The Concourse (part of Deadspin) are using nerdy logic and think that peppering sophistry with swear words in this bad article and hope the profanity makes it sound angry and full of gravitas.
No fellas, it's wrong, and quite frankly, silly.
And you sound abusive.
They do not understand why The New York Daily News imploded. It is the small town boy's worst nightmare come true: you try to run away from your small-town roots by running away to a big city, such as New York City, and then you found the passive hack to Win At Life. Those big city slickers know everything, and are the grim and gritty Promised Land where there are cool coffeeshops, and hip bars and nightclubs where you can rub the noses of the rubes you left behind that you are Very Special, Talented, and getting high with sophistication and edginess.
Take that, having to grow up next to a cow past! I won!
Reality doesn't care about your inferiority complex. Truth knows you are a scared little boy who mindlessly follows other people's scripts to scrape by.
And here we are, with a Big City Newspaper that imploded.
And Deadspin doesn't understand why.
It is not "class warefare." That is some knee-jerk temper tantrum used by unoriginal and passive thinkers who do not actually know what happened to journalism in general.
But simpletons looks for simplistic answers, or TORTEE.
Or answers that put the blame on everyone else but them.
People who go into journalism, on the whole, come from wealthier backgrounds than the general population. Yes, the pay is lousy, meaning you need to have someone financially be able to support you to be in that job.
Not everyone, but a lot.
So what happened to the New York Daily News?
As someone who covered the business of newspapers, I can tell you:
1. The industry had the monopoly on communications. When blessed capitalism rigged the board to their favour, journalists fawned all over it. Deadspin's temper tantrum is self-serving and hypocritical as it tries to pander to Millennial who prefer their own selfies to someone else's hissies that do not mention their selfies.
2. The Internet came along and took away the rig, and hence, the monopoly. Media owners did not change their strategy. Journalists didn't change their methods. J-schools didn't study how the new landscape shifted and how to keep the industry alive in a new form that took the new reality into account. THE END.
3. The profession thought it was So Superiorly Special that they thought people would still use their product by acting more arrogant and aggro than before. People began to find their information elsewhere because they did not need a media outlet to disseminate their information and opinions.
4. The industry did not change its tactics or structure and lost audiences, but more importantly, did not hook in a new generation of news consumer who grew up with the Internet. Their inertia prevented any renaissance from happening.
5. The new breed of owners saw an opportunity. They knew that journalism was dead, but there were still assets, such as real estate to make a profit. This is not sustainable profit. This is one-time smash-and-grab profit. When you begin to attract the vultures who feed off a carcass, your profession is dead. There is nothing left to do.
6. The asset-squeezers muscle in and squeeze those assets, selling them off. It is not as if that money can be re-invested in the product or "spread around" your employees who you start letting go with no need to re-invest or replace. That's now a black hole. The companies make money selling off the assets and then go elsewhere.
7. The A-list asset-squeezers sell off to B and C-list asset squeezers who do the same with the less profitable assets.
8. Eventually, there is nothing left to squeeze and the outlet shuts down entirely or is merged with a slightly less decomposed carcass. Sooner or later, there is no profit in squeezing a corpse, and it closes up shop permanently.
The temper tantrums journalists are throwing are rich. When they still had a pulpit to spew nincompoopity, they ignored the problems, because hey, their backsides weren't in the crosshairs. The angry white boys didn't care because they could strut as they issued World According to Me decrees.
And now that it is their backsides getting the boot, the howling begins, and suddenly, this whole Pinko "Let's blame it on the Man and capitalism" is being co-opted by them.
Memo to Deadspin: Shut up about the Man. You knuckleheads are The Man. Now that it's your balloons getting popped, you are having childish fits. When capitalism gave you that cushy platform, it was glorious, but when it is your turn to be stymied, there is outrage?
Yes, what is happen is more than "legal": it is the inevitable consequences of not being aware of your reality, ignoring warning form people who do not look like you, and losing a monopoly.
Journalism has been antiquated for about twenty years. It cannot survive in its current form, and capitalism is not responsible for your incompetence.
The laid-off staff of the New York Daily News are not "victims" of "class warfare." Homeless people are victims of class warfare, you arrogant twits with graduate degrees.
Those laid-off reporters at the Daily News are as culpable for their implosion as the rest of the profession. Nothing prevented any of them from making bold moves forward, but when you follow scripts thinking you are stealing someone else's ideas, and you are passive, making changes seems tantamount to admitting that you are flawed and what you did in the past was -- gasp! -- wrong.
And just what would those small-town boys and girls you walked away from think?
Grow up, little boys, and stop blaming everyone else for your incompetence that destroyed a profession. You wanted the drooling adoration and the power to persuade people who really have their own lives, hopes, dreams, and ambitions, and they don't have to listen to you.
And Memo to the Daily Beast: your article "Tronc Exec Tells Daily News Staff to Their Faces: We Have No Strategy" is as oblivious as it is myopic.
Are journalists really that unfathomably stupid?
The reason Tronc brass told their staff that they do not have a plan is simple: because no plan can work for animate a dead profession.
When you see that circulation is going down with no way to rejuvenate it, people will not read your junk even if you give it away for free, and advertisers are leaving in droves, it's over. There is no plan because none is needed.
Got that? I doubt it.
It is that willful ignorance that killed journalism.
It is why you are seeing irrational Trump-bashing, and all the civil war-mongering: wars usually were a boon to journalism, and if it takes a war to bring it back, they will do it. Even if it kills you.
Except it won't. Social media changed the world's thinking, and no war is going to save it.
A day late, and a dollar short.
And instead of trying to incite the masses, the profession could have just did what it needed to do: make changes that kept up with the times, pulled itself together, and improve its methods.
It is a lot less violent, and a lot more helpful...