The Hangover's Coming

So you thought that once George W. Bush was out of office and Barack Obama was president everything would turn into sunshine and puppies, right? Just like Disney princess wannabes who just need to find their Prince Charming so their lives can turn into a fairy tale? Or the clueless CEOs at Internet startups I used to meet who thought all they needed was one story in the Wall Street Journal and the sales phones would ring off the hook?

Hopefully you do not think that way. But I’m willing to bet many do, especially the first-time voters among young Americans and minorities who are now looking at Obama as their savior. Unfortunately reality will soon bite them back. The last time I saw this much praising a new president among the youth and the media alike was…1992. Clinton came in as the last Democratic messiah who kicked the evil GOP out of the White House, and just two years later was so unpopular he ushered in Republican majorities in Congress.

Nobody knows what will happen in two years but a few things will definitely occur. First, Obama appears to be lining the Cabinet with longtime Democratic insiders. They are eminently qualified and cannot be worse than the current White House advisors and Cabinet, but anyone who voted for Obama because he promised change and was bringing an outsider’s and Mr. Smith type idealism to Washington is probably disappointed already.

Second, anyone who voted for Obama on a single issue (for example, because he would end the war in Iraq ASAP or institute a national health plan) is going to get disappointed. Getting anything done in Washington is like turning the Titanic. Change may come, but it’s not coming fast.

Third, at some point in the next four years, Barack Obama is going to make a mistake. In fact he may make more than one mistake. We’ll see how the newcomers to politics react when he makes this mistake. It may be something completely understandable or minor to wonks or political insiders, but if it involves breaking a campaign promise he could lose much of the goodwill he achieved.

The reason so many are jaded about politics is that candidates promise so much during the campaign but once they are in office they either realize they will be unable to deliver much of what they promise, or because circumstances arise that place different priorities on the front burner. Items fall through the cracks in every job, but politicians have so much scrutiny and so many people depending on them that those errors are magnified. I’d advise everyone who voted for the first time, especially in light of the current economy, to be patient with their expectations. Change may be coming, but it’s a long time coming.

Print Journalism - Burning Out or Fading Away?

Here’s my first prediction for the reign of the next president – the print journalism industry will continue to vanish, and journalism itself will continue to flourish.

Last week was beyond bad for print journalists. Time Inc. announced 600 layoffs. Gannett cut 10% of its workforce. McGraw Hill downsized 270. The advertising industry, which heavily subsidizes print journalism, sees rough times ahead for the next few quarters. And for grisly humor, the Motley Fool has a newspaper stock death pool.

Most ominous of all, the staid NY Times publisher Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger blames the industry’s woes on an overkill of information. But he claims people will eventually turn to “trusted” places like The New York Times to gain the right perspective on the all the clutter and noise emanating from blogs, cell phones and competing 24-hour newscycles where everything older than 15 minutes is antiquated. I must say that Pinchy’s thoughts don’t exactly sound correct to me. If anything, it is reminiscent of the superior attitude that the Times’ critics routinely deride it for. And notice which company is part of that death pool.

Regular readers of The Boston Globe, which is going through the declining ad revenue, layoffs and page shrinkage problems throughout the industry have undoubtedly noticed that the print version is starting to resemble USA Today – same four sections and same shorter stories. But if you only read the Globe online, you’d never notice the difference and you’d still get the same content. I’m not sure if Boston.com is profitable yet, but obviously the Globe (owned by The New York Times) is headed in the right direction. Long gone are the times when the news media controlled the airwaves and political parties. If anything, the Internet has liberated the public from that. The plethora of choices and the ability to interact with the audience online are the future for both independent media and the stalwarts who can correctly embrace them. This was not possible as recently as 10 years ago.

And here’s one paper that’s getting it right – remember the Christian Science Monitor? It’s going online only next year. The future of substantive media can currently be seen in the success stories of Salon and Slate, plus the bloggers who were either smart enough to get on the wagon early or who have the talent and time to make their blogs successful (I don’t fall into that category yet. Maybe one day…)

Will newspapers disappear? No. Stalwarts like The New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal have the brand power to stick around in some smaller form. Planes and automobiles didn’t completely kill trains either. But I do see many newspapers moving to Sunday-only print versions or evolving into some other kind of niche where they can exist. Or it can follow the Monitor’s lead and embrace the future instead of fighting it tooth and nail.