emily bell
John Gapper
@emilybell @guardian I think the brand is worth a lot and someone will always rescue it. But then it won't be owned by a trust anymore.
.@johngapper , not a trolling question but, seriously, how would you evaluate curren @guardian balance sheet in terms of 'value' or 'worth'?
-
.
@johngapper@guardian this presumes journalism and it's successful impact always correlate with profitability. A discredited notion,surely -
@emilybell@guardian you're being obtuse, Emily. If it goes bust, the rest goes too. And it's currently heading that way. -
.
@johngapper two things.a. It is not going bust, it has a cross subsidy model you don't like. b. 'the rest' has happened. -
@emilybell if a. is true, then fine. I think it's unproven, to put it mildly. As to b., that implies it can pack up now, which seems odd. -
@johngapper@emilybell better now than 20 years ago no? -
.
@johngapper no, it means when you say the 'rest goes too' that's a corporate lens on societal benefit. -
@emilybell I'm merely observing that if it stops publishing, there ain't no societal benefit any more. -
@emilybell There's an easier way to save the press. Get rid of CPC ads. It's like only paying a newspaper when a coupon's redeemed. -
@emilybell@johngapper even at current losses – and those are falling at a decent clip – there's a good decade or so of cash left -
@emilybell@johngapper Think Guardian's woes versus other papers are frequently overstated, personally -
@emilybell@johngapper Look at Indy – or Times/S. times adjusting to life after subsidy, for example -
@jamesrbuk@johngapper yes of course you are right...because it represents the most uncomfortable truth for news 'industry'. -
@johngapper@emilybell you mean no additional societal benefit. Since society already banked the benefit. Will need new endowment 2 continue
Horatio Mortimer
Lee Flohr
James Ball