Matt Purdue
05/01/2007
The media love to cover the media. Every editor and reporter I’ve ever known is irresistibly attracted to stories about other journalists and news outlets. Certainly, we like to pat ourselves on the back. In this month’s issue of Worth, our article on creating and managing a successful philanthropic prize program presents as a model one of the most prominent awards schemes in history, the Pulitzer Prizes.
In the writing of his 1904 will, Joseph Pulitzer, founder of the New York World and St. Louis Post Dispatch, spelled out a prize program to honor recipients not only in journalism, but also drama, literature and music. Pulitzer wisely inserted flexibility into his last wishes to enable the awards committee to alter the nature of his prizes as media evolved. As Darlene M. Siska, who wrote our story, notes, one of the reasons the Pulitzer Prizes have thrived for 90 years is because they enjoy an inherent public relations advantage: Media outlets around the country love to report on the winners.
But the majority of reports published and aired by media about media are decidedly negative. Call it schadenfreude or envy or even a public service, but we love to report on media gone wrong. Perhaps no other business takes such delight in self-flagellation. For our cover story on the new interest in old media displayed by some of America’s successful businessmen, our writer Michelle Leder had no trouble finding reports of the demise of the newspaper industry—many of them written by print journalists. Clearly, in an age of 24/7 digital news coverage and News 2.0 fashioned by bloggers, wiki participants and amateur videographers, newspapers must evolve. Many have arrived late to the party, and their share prices and valuations have plummeted.
As our cover subject Mark Cuban points out, too many newspaper executives have become exceedingly arrogant. Cuban, about as technophilic as they come, admits to feeling a certain allure for newspapers—he reads four of them a day. He hopes that the prosperous entrepreneurs linked to newspaper deals—people such as David Geffen and Jack Welch—who have little or no experience in media could signal a rebirth for this industry. Reading between the lines, Cuban seems to be saying that, while print media needs to unabashedly embrace digital technology, it also needs the investment of power brokers who appreciate newspapers not only for their growth potential, but also as vanity plays.
Today marks a tipping point for newspapers. Will they be able to transform themselves around the way the public consumes its information? Our article examines men who are wagering millions on the former outcome.
Finally, by the time you read this, one of 2007’s most interesting media stories will probably be long forgotten, but bears revisiting, particularly by Worth readers. In January, The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and other publications reported that the head of Citigroup’s global wealth management group, Todd Thomson, was ousted from the company. The Wall Street Journal wrote that his departure "came amid internal tension over his judgment and expenses, including use of Citigroup’s corporate jet," according to people familiar with the matter. Of course, my brothers and sisters in the media mentioned that Thomson had offered a seat on the jet to one of our colleagues, CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo. The story had all the makings of a telenovela, filled with vague references to their "relationship."
At Worth, we had Thomson near the top of our speed dial. His division’s earning leaped 38 percent in the fourth quarter of 2006, and we were always curious what he was doing right. We will continue to strive to bring you unbiased coverage of the private banking and wealth management industries. But, I’ll admit, Thomson will be missed, especially by those of us who always fly coach.