Memo to the New York Times: Journalism is already dead, but do not blame the "economic model" when your problems go right into the heart of your newsrooms.

Capture.PNG

Memo to the New York Times, that ship has sailed. Your profession rots in the ground.

There hasn’t been any journalism for a very long time. Do not blame the “economic model.” You no longer have the monopoly on communications. People prefer their own posturing and opinions than the PR firms’ scripts you all parrot.

Journalism never got empirical, and those in the business are too dense to see where they have faltered. Once upon a time, it was just philosophy until you had thinkers conduct experiments to test that philosophy.

And then psychology was born.

You would think that journalism would naturally grow in the right direction. No dice. I had a lippy editor patronize and mansplain to me how this was not possible — without any expertise, knowledge on the matter, or shred of proof.

I have over a quarter century of proof that it can be done. I conducted experiments. I studied and researched the profession inside and out. I tested my model. It is much easier to do than the clunky old ways. I tweaked and made it possible to be a portable laboratory.

If you can have entire newsroom on the smartphone, you can be a walking laboratory. I had a very lively discussion with someone about this recently, and it is funny how people outside the profession not only see the possibilities, they have suggestions and offer other proof how information becomes corrupted and tainted.

When I suggest an alternative to journalism, people first become shocked, but then excited. It requires a very special kind of training, but the old guard do not want an alternative to make them look even worse.

The reason we have no journalism is simple: journalists and their overlords are actively preventing it from happening.

But I can take them…