The concept of using technology to refer to another creation --- on the Internet, through linking to another page --- is part of a significant skirmish between the world's largest press baron and a Web aggregator in the United Kingdom.

While it may be definitive, this battle between News Corp. and NewsNow may portend the battleground: Is it a right to link out, or does one need approval?

Blogger, author, academic and journalist Jeff Jarvis has been a longtime proponent of what he calls the link economy. He sees it as essential to journalism's success --- you scratch my back, I scratch yours, in essence --- and believes the business model of the future will owe much to using this link economy.

But Rupert Murdoch's team has another idea. It won't let NewsNow link to its content, feeling that the aggregator's repurposing of it denies News Corp. of revenue it should have to itself.

In his latest column for rhe Guardian, Jarvis is rather pointed: "I fear that what is really in danger here is the doctrine of openness on which ­journalism and an informed society depend."

He asserts that if a link is public for one, it should be public for all.

What do you think?
 
 
He remains a believer in the ability of legacy media to transform, but it's possible to detect impatience in the writing of author, academic, journalist and adviser Jeff Jarvis.

His latest post prescribes a blizzard of initiatives. He says it's not too late, but that legacy media are at one minute to midnight. He suggests, among other things:

1. Stay in print, split functions of companies, outsource everything possible.
2. Invest in local networks of independent sites, add value with curation and sales.
3. Create a pure ad network.
4. Create a high-end product and charge a lot for it.
5. Create niche services and publications.

It's a typically insightful post with many more suggestions. Recommended reading.
 
 
It has been a busy few days in the life of the world's prime search engine and advertising vehicle, Google Inc., and the threads of change have been pulled together nicely by Jeff Jarvis in his latest post.

Mainly what Jarvis is pointing to is Google's evolution into a company that wants its search technology broadened and applied into the mobile environment. It is strengthening its search results.

But he's also demonstrating that the company is getting even more personal in its gathering and disseminating of information, perhaps to the edge of the envelope.

Among the areas of activity in recent days: the imminent acquisition of Yelp, the distribution of tags to businesses for augmented reality search, the seeping of news about the Google Phone and its capabilities, and the deeper understanding of the Google411 service and how the firm wants to move into the voice-activated search field big-time.

It's an enlightening post, typical for Buzzmachine.
 
 
Last week Jeff Jarvis argued that the future of journalism was entrepreneurial, not institutional. But his post focused more on creation and lacked an explanation of his theory of distribution.

Now he has filled in that gap with a post on how the future involves ecosystems. No longer a system of control, of acquisition, or of mergers, Jarvis' vision is one of platforms, entrepreneurial enterprises, and networks.

While it's true now that companies have networks, Jarvis envisions a world of collaboration and not zero-sum-game wrestling for parts of the pie.

He thinks news "would come more and more from ecosystems made up of scores of companies operating under different means, motives, and models, each dependent on the others to optimize their success."
 
 
Jeff Jarvis writes in Buzzmachine that the journalist in the time ahead will need to be a robust part of an entrepreneurial operation. Institutional is old, entrepreneurial is new.

Jarvis has a lengthy but clear mantra: "I believe journalists must become entrepreneurs. They don’t all need to be sole proprietors of hypersomething blogs. But they need to make smart business decisions when they decide where to put their effort. They need to sense and serve the market. They need to work with innovators."

Jarvis says one of his mistakes was to assume organizations could reinvent. There is a future to be built, but it should not involve more public funds as the support. That is an act of desperation, Jarvis asserts.
 
 
Far from supporting newspapers' drive for a paywall, Buzzmachine blogger and author Jeff Jarvis is suggesting the opposite course: Grab as many people as you can through hyperdistribution.

He means widgets, reverse syndication, specialization, social engagement and APIs to encourage development. "This ain't about getting people to come to your home pages," he suggests.

Rather, it ought to be a full-on effort to develop more and more users, particularly engaged users who will consume and distribute content.

"Right now, news organizations should be trying to reach more people and engage with them more deeply."
 
 
At a presentation today at the Aspen Institute conference on journalism, veteran media executive, CUNY professor and Buzzmachine blogger Jeff Jarvis talked about a new business model for hyperlocal news.

It presumes big and doesn't necessarily accommodate small.

But it's a first step in the reconsideration of the metrics necessary to ensure strong local coverage takes place in the time ahead.

Essentially Jarvis' model organizes local bloggers into a network that associates for advertising.

The concept founders on the existing economics of digital advertising, but the principle is an interesting one that ought to be explored more fully before dismissing it. (He took a fair amount of heat quickly from others attending the conference.)

It isn't clear how the bloggers would organize to avoid excessive duplication or assign and share work, but no matter --- that's in the details for later.

 
 

The Associated Press has sent new signals in recent days of its intention to protect its content and deal harshly with those who use it extensively. It has proposed a news registry to tag and track its content as it's being used, with the intention of working through arrangements with users to pay for that content.

Setting aside the technical questions about such an approach --- most bloggers and aggregators find it simple to cut and paste content in such a way as to bypass something like AP is proposing --- the larger question of the inherent approach has touched off some extreme criticism of the venerable news agency.

Jeff Jarvis, one of the more notable critics of AP's approach in recent months, is arguing that the assets inside the Internet offer more than AP could --- thus, individuals and organizations should mass and replace it.

In Techdirt, Mike Masnick implies (but doesn't provide clear sourcing) that insiders are critical of AP's approach. He is suggesting Reuters step in and pick up the ball. It should encourage bloggers to link to them instead, he argues.

 
 

Jeff Jarvis' Buzzmachine is required reading in the digital age, but if you're going to understand something new today, it should be his evaluation of how Twitter's open publishing system --- its API --- has particular value.

For a few days the Twitterverse has been alight with praise of the efforts by many people to employ Twitter's open system to help thwart efforts to curtail commentary coming from an Iran in political turmoil.

Jarvis articulates nicely the technical enabling of the Iran dissidents through Twitterphiles that employ its open-sourced publishing. In some ways people are pointing to this juncture as the time Twitter became of global value --- especially in view of restrictions on mainstream coverage --- but Jarvis is the first to put it smartly into sentences.

 
 

Jeff Jarvis has one of his more pointed posts today in asserting that journalists need to create value in an era of abundance and waste.

That's right, waste. Jarvis sees a lot of inefficiency, even in challenging economic times --- reporters performing roles others are, providing content others are, going through the motions instead of going through a process of considering how to be different.

He extends his argument to bloggers --- and I feel a little tweaked by the critique --- in asserting that just providing links without adding value isn't sufficient. Point taken.

What he's noticing is what happens when resources are challenged: Quite naturally some newsrooms focus on what has worked in the past. He shouldn't be surprised to see a CNN correspondent doing the same type of story over and over. Human instincts don't necessarily lead to bravery in challenging circumstances. But he's not wrong: Newsrooms will thrive if they find more interesting ways to provide content and fewer ways to duplicate what others are providing.


 
DA25E68FDEC14EAFA7B2A27D26C48058