editorial
10 Jun 2010
Is Newmatilda.com Still Waving Goodbye?
We're still trying to figure out whether or not we can keep newmatilda.com afloat - and unfortunately, it's not looking good, writes Marni Cordell
Dear readers,
We here at NM HQ would like to extend our very warm thanks to everyone who has contacted us in the last fortnight offering to subscribe or to donate to help keep us afloat. Your support has been overwhelming. It’s fantastic to know that our work is so appreciated by our community of readers — and that there are so many people who share our conviction that independent media outlets like newmatilda.com are vital to the health of a working civil society.
As we count down the days to 25 June, the date when we stop publishing, we thought it was time we gave you an update on our situation, and specifically, an explanation as to why we haven’t jumped to take you up on your generous pledges.
We’ve been bombarded with offers from readers keen to subscribe to a new newmatilda.com, via the comments on the editorial announcing our demise, via email, and via Twitter. We’re certainly not closed to the idea of opening up a subscription model, but after much consideration, the NM staff have decided that we can’t go down that path without an immediate injection of funds from a like-minded investor.
Why? Subscriptions and donations are by nature uncertain revenue sources and we just can’t be sure that they will cover our significant running costs in either the short term or the long term — which, on top of the wages for five staff, include contributor fees, rent, defamation insurance and upgrades to the website, plus incidentals such as hosting fees and office supplies. These things all add up.
We are reluctant to take money from readers for something we may not be able to deliver. If we don’t get enough paid readers quickly, the money we do receive might keep us going for a few more months — but it won’t guarantee our long-term survival. That means that in six months time we could well be in the awkward situation of having to hand money back. Without a cushion of financial backing, our situation is too precarious for us to be able to accept subscriptions in good faith.
And of course, we also need to consider our own job security. It’s been suggested by some that we could cut costs by paying our writers less or by transforming the site into a group blog. It’s also been suggested we recruit a team of volunteer editors or work for nothing ourselves. These are not options we are prepared to entertain.
NM writers are already paid below industry rates and it’s very unlikely that we could attract the quality of content that we do if were to pay nothing at all. We’d like to be able to pay our writers more, not less, for the work that they do researching, writing, and rewriting articles for us.
We have nothing against group blogs but newmatilda.com has never operated on such a decentralised editorial model — and to turn the website into a group blog would fundamentally change its identity. We are a professional outfit and the editorial staff play a vital role in keeping standards high and filling in the gaps. Nothing appears on the site without thorough discussion here in the office and it’s very rare for articles not to pass through a couple of stages of revision. We check facts, we jiggle apostrophes, we make sure no one gets sued. Our writers appreciate this attention and we know that readers would notice immediately if unedited content was posted on the site.
Finally, if we were to convert to a subscription model site, we’d also need to consider putting some of our content behind a paywall. This would mean that regular readers who do not subscribe would simply miss out on some of what we have to offer. Restricting access to content isn’t out of the question but it would entail another realignment of newmatilda.com’s core identity.
The good news out of all of this is that if an investor were to come on board they wouldn’t necessarily be stumping up large sums of money in the long term — but rather, acting as a buffer while we get back on our feet and work out the answers to some of the questions above.
Over the past fortnight we’ve been contacted by a number of individuals and organisations who are interested in acquiring the newmatilda.com brand and website. However, thus far none of them have made a concrete offer. We are still open to serious inquiries, but time is running out.
In these last two weeks, make sure you get in contact if you think you know someone who can help keep newmatilda.com publishing.
Thanks again for all of your support — and enjoy it while you can!
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Twitter
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
Good luck finding support. I wish I were in a position to be of help. *hugs*
I suppose there’s no chance of a gift from Clive Palmer - no questions asked?
Oh, for goodness sake, you’re either dying or you’re not.
While the search for a miracle cure might be inevitable it is not edifying. It is inconceivable that NM could continue on in anything like its current form so better that it dies an easeful death and stops struggling.
Any chance of getting an ipad paid app?
Where are Twiggy and Clive Palmer?
Marnie, there is a range of ways that NM might consider.
While NM is a great news service, I suggest that you can increase your attractiveness and thus your income.
1) Make the site more active in helping cashed up groups (e.g. businesses) to make useful decisions and make money (e.g. ways to increase business)
2) Give readers a means by which they can provide better ways of doing things to our governments (there’s 3 levels and none of them appear to be working properly)
3) Use your research skills to create searchable data bases that are of value to readers, or particular classes of them (e.g. who represents who, which committees need which information)
4) Link to highly linked sites and organisations to increase traffic to your site which may come to search some of the items in 1 -3 above.
There’s loads more opportunities like this but they all require a different approach than just news. E.g. see Business Spectator for a successful model that delivers useful news for a profit.
Plenty more where that came from if anyone cares.
Meanwhile, all the best.
I think your approach is right. Your writers can’t work for charity. Either get paid or get out! The punters need to recognise the value of intellectual capital.
come on fellas! gina rinehart perhaps? rose porteous even?
Australiana
just F-ck off.
If you want to gloat over the demise of NM or my job prospects, do it somewhere else.
Best of luck NM, the media landscape would be less professional and entertaining without you. HEY Billionaire mining bosses, throw NM a cool Million and I will not vote labor…….or Liberal.
Here’s hopeing for the best.
Ben, I’m not gloating, I just don’t see the point of pretending that NM can be resurrected.
What I did dislike about NM is the attitude that said we don’t make mistakes and, if we do, we don’t admit to them. That attitude was apparent in NM’s gleeful gloating in its presentation of the ‘Sarah Palin stole Bristol’s baby’ story. This story was always transparently malicious rubbish but Marni and Rod refused to admit they had made a mistake running it as the lead story the day after Palin was nominated. It was absolute tabloid trash and the fact that it was ‘left’ tabloid trash did not improve it at all. To admit that, at best, the story was an error of judgement would have been wise and honourable but that admission never came despite trenchant criticism from myself and other readers.
Similarly, I attacked your judgement when you said that Labor and the Coalition had equal chances of winning the next election. You never withdrew that foolish error despite the fact that you seemed to be backing away from it in subsequent articles.
At the heart of NM there was a failure of honesty and integrity. Maybe it wasn’t the major reason for its failure but it certainly didn’t help.
what a sad sad day if you close It is Australia in microcosm.
bright ideas and innovations wether intellectual or material (such as manufacturing) doesn’t survive because everything is seen thru a very narrow lens with a short focus .
Twiggy stirs up the workers re the big new tax but he does not tell those same workers how he will welcome Coalition changes to IR laws that will effect every one of those workers in a negative way,.
Good luck and I do hope there is a saty of execution and jobs are secure at reasonable rates
But to all your contributors please accpet our thanks that we have got well argued points of view as against the the Australian where irrational argument is passed of as discussoin because of the Elephant in the room
Alex Njoo
Ben, I agree. “Australiana’ belongs to that ‘great (intellectually) unwashed’, hiding behind a ridiculously faux pseudonym, a lot of whimper, nothing to contribute etc. etc. Furthermore, they’d be the kind who voted for the likes of Howard, Abbott et al hoping that they’d prosper by doing nothing. They didn’t and they never will.
A brief profile of ‘Australiana” reads something like this: a so-called ‘academic’ (no Real Estate agent would read NM) sans intellectual content but lots of post graduate degrees,
Back to the more important issue at hand, the survival of NM. I can’t believe that there’s no one in this country who has the means to support a voice such as NM hasn’t come out to do so.We’re indeed a a generous nation wallowing in the abyss of a political void.
It looks like Emperor Rupert The First will remain the ruler of Australia and all its territories once more! I’ve always believed that the enemy within is the one to watch out for. Who else believe in the true freedom of speech? What about those Libertarians? Terry Lane, where are you when we need you?
Australiana -
It’s hard to believe (but also quite funny) that you’re still banging on about this non-issue - both here and on Crikey, i see (as “David Sanderson”)!.
For the last time: that Sarah Palin “article” you hate so much was a ‘blogwatch’ collection - one piece in an (often quite funny) series that NM did on what the blogs were saying on a particular issue. Not a story. And obviously not an NM editorial. It was a survey of blog content - sometimes very weird, sometimes very interesting. (I liked it, anyway.)
So NM didn’t “run” the Sarah-Palin-staole-Bristol’s-baby story. (Are you hearing this?) I really hope you can now relax your “trenchant criticism” and cries of outrage - it’s just pompous and silly, especially when you’re so plainly barking up the wrong tree. (Although a part of me would be sad if you do let it go.)
People who have enjoyed NM often mention that it’s refreshingly sophisticated - but I guess it’s just a bit too sophisticated for some. I especially like the commenters who still seem to think Ben Pobjie is being serious. (How do these people get through their lives?)
If and when NM folds I will miss visiting the site and watching the confusion of these poor souls. And I will miss you too, Australiana, and all the laughs you’ve provided since that fateful blogwatch all those months ago…
A Howard and Abbott voter! That’s really below the custom-made bullet-proof vest. Fortunately, I can plead not guilty to both charges, and do so with a clear conscience. I wouldn’t even vote Howard in as head of international cricket - and I don’t give a stuff about cricket.
How one might vote for Howard and then “prosper by doing nothing” is a total bloody mystery but since I have done neither I guess I’ll never find out.
I am also very hurt by the attack on my name. I come from a line of truly wonderful australiana’s, many of whom fought and died in the gutters of our great cities. Some of them were unwashed from time to time but all of them eventually had a bath. You should hang your head in shame by daring to besmirch their memory.
I guess if NM does survive, surely it will need to undertake a major makeover, re-invent itself, rise anew from the ashes like the Phoenix.
To serve up more of the same, sadly, will lead to the same outcome!
www.dangerouscreation.com
BarneyG, you misrepresent how the story was presented in NM. As I said earlier NM’s presentation of the story was full of gossipy gleeful gloating.
I won’t rehash the whole thing here. Those who are interested can easily find the story, and the subsequent argument between readers and editors, in the NM archive.
It is amusing that you found NM “refreshingly sophisticated”. Most people found it dull and predictable. Marni has been making the odd claim that it is closing down just as readership and influence was growing strongly. From the outside that looks implausible. Does she have any solid evidence for this claim or is it just tiresome spin from someone spruiking for a job?
I’d really like to see New Matilda prosper because I think they (particularly Ben E) have a lot to offer to the rest of us.
The question is how does that happen so that NM can earn a decent crust.
My contention (I’m a complex systems and business consultant) is that the readership NM attracts is not sufficiently large or cashed up to attract real money. That’s not a criticism, it’s just a fact perceived by me.
If that’s correct, then opportunities exist by attracting a wider and wealthier pool of readers (so that advertisers and others find NM a more attractive site).
Business Spectator sells their product for a few hundred dollars a year, plus they’ve got all kinds of other cash making gigs. How do they do it? They appeal to people with money by showing them ways to make more money.
So I ask, what can NM do that will help people to earn more money, or save money?
I suggest there’s plenty…a series on cutting household costs…becoming independent of government (own power etc)…investing ethically…making your own produce and selling it…showing political candidates how to connect with voters….whatever…the list is long. Modify the brand to attract a new audience that advertisers (or whoever) want to deal with.
NM is an excellent alternative commentary site and it’s not making enough money. Hence one approach is to add to the commentary by creating new value for a new range of customers, while not alienating existing readers.
Entirely possible I’d have thought.
ben.eltham 10/06/10 2:17PM
“Australiana
just F-ck off.
If you want to gloat over the demise of NM or my job prospects, do it somewhere else”
There was nothing wrong with Australiana’s post on 10/6/10 12.42 PM at all , rather you over sensitively intrpreted someting that was never even said or implied
Australiana stated obvous and what Marni prev said anyway , ie current bus model can not work at least shorterm as its loss making , nor can a subs only base , & Australiana’s reasonable asumption is there wont be a white knight within th 2 weeks closure date so its underfying delaying closure Thought a quite reasonable coment
I posted oposition to subs idea as NW seems to want to be all or noting , a pro Net MSN with staff etc but subs wuld be insufficent and not reliable income flow Whilst i dont agree with your Greens type progresive slant only a moron wishs someone to be unemployed and I sugested short term what Marni now per abov rules out…ie a group volunteer editorial based blog with/without a one only paid staff as interim step to build income base gradual or altern to buy time to get a white knights..but if you lot determind not to change at all despite even Uncle Ruperts net/paper econamic bus warnings , & not listen to alterns & instead to remain 100% as is and go down 100% as is , then your only “out” is luck of a knight , and in 2 weeks
Whatever NM decides, I wish you all the very best of luck.
I will miss being able to discuss the political events & having a place to vent my concern but will keep an air of hope that NM will survive.
Kindest regards, The Atheist.
Marnie: You still have not told us anything about the current owner’s position on this. I wrote asking for open disclosure about what is going on. NM is behaving like the ABC - refusing to be transparent with its shareholders. So, come clean.
And “Australiana”, you have made some good points but they are worth nothing if we don’t know who you are and where you are coming from. You might be Chris Mitchell or James Murdoch or Gerard Horrendouson ?
Peter Monie
Peter, barneyG has already done the detective work for you and ‘discovered’ my real name. But real names make no difference to online forums. There is no verification process and there are dozens of people across Australia with an identical name. More importantly, you know nothing about any of them. As the old cartoon says: on the internet no-one knows you’re a dog.
The only real ethical requirement is that one consistently use one name in a forum and not play games with multiple identities.
For an example of an interesting and vibrant online journal (that NM mostly wasn’t) take a look at Inside Story:
http://inside.org.au/
Was too depressed about your likely demise to write before but Marni’s editorial gave me a faint ray of hope .
NM was launched with a ‘flawed business model’ way back in 2004 (I was there), smallish donations, never enough subscribers, but heaps of goodwill and effort plus writers given crucial editorial independence.
The need for NM is greater now than it was then and Marni and her team have worked wonders. You’ve found some brilliant writer and cartoonists and NM is now more often than not essential reading when very little else is. The muzzled or mediocre mainstream is floundering around trying to find its business model and most independent media has editorial restraints.
The student market? - kids are more radical and perturbed than their parents, it seems to me. iphone/ipad apps will eventually start to pay off - but in the meantime the only model is the US Nation - subs kept cheap-ish and the begging bowl.
Hang in there if you possibly can - and thanks for the huge effort. Wish I was rich.
I have been with NM since its start and paid for life membership in the vain hope for some alternative journalism to the predominance of The Australian.
I have supported several forays into new papers and magazines and to date more have failed than succeeded.
This is a pretty small country to support much in the alternative political scene.
I am saddened but not surprised by the approaching demise of NM you will be missed.
Australiana or whatever you name is - your view on names really does not wash. We talk of the global village, but in this “town square” as the ghastly Mark Scott likes to call it, there are no stocks or suitable forms of retribution to make people accountable for what they say. Which devalues the currency of their verbal emissions.
Coming back to the future of NM, Hilary McPhee wears her heart on her sleeve, but we do not need rich people, we need people who can afford to buy shares - not expecting a dividend other than knowing they are contributing to a worthwhile cause.
Look at Hepburn Wind, the community windfarm in Victoria. People have put in nearly $10million with no guarantee of recompense. See http://www.hepburnwind.com.au
The Manchester Guardian is another example of a notforprofit which kicked on a bit.
So, Marnie and the people not telling us the full story, how much do you need to keep it going? How many shares at $200 each would need to be bought? Talk to Simon Holmes a Court at Hepburn Wind. Lots of small contributions can make things happen
Peter Monie
I’ve noticed that the Wikipedia entry on NM is already in the past tense. I wonder who wrote it?
moniep, I apologise for offering you some intelligent reasoning. That was obviously not suitable for you.
We need all the independent media we can get! Between them, News Ltd, ABC and talkback radio put out a high wall of right wing propaganda that is overwhelming public perceptions. The Age and SMH are trying quite well under difficult circumstances. Crikey is invaluable. Blogs such as The Political Sword, Gutter Trash, Inside Story, The Daily Bludge, Poll Bludger and Larvatus Prodeo also help. But the need for diversity has never been greater. Please don’t fold on us, New Matilda if you can possibly avoid it. You can count on my support in whatever means possible.
Has anyone spoken to Evan Thornley? He has plenty of money and this would be right up his alley. I interviewed him once for the Big Issue and I know someone who knows him still…
Please let me know if I should follow this up.
Australiana wrote “Most people found it dull and predictable.” Life’s short Australiana, if it’s dull and predictable read something else.
Brendan O’Reilly
(No, not the NSW senior bureaucrat)
Hi all,
I will be forthcoming in admitting I have not read all the back and forth between Australiana and the rest of us (and I purposefully use the term us) because it bored and angered me.
“Australiana” a couple of points that I would like to convey to you:
1) Don’t hide behind a poorly crafted pseudonym - clearly you have a name and a relationships with NM, not to mention plenty of opinions so why don’t you back them with your identity.
2) Has NM made mistakes? Probably. Has NM published articles that aren’t my personal ‘cup of tea’? Certainly. Does this mean they should go quietly to the gallows? Defintely not. Every media outlet has its good days and bad days, and while I am not familiar with the stories that you have mentioned, I’m not willing to crucify the team based on them, or your opinion of them.
3) Finally… Grow up! We are talking about a real business and the livelihoods of real people here and your self-centred apocalyptic style rants about the demise of NM being aligned with the mistakes of greater journalism are both misguided and reek of sour grapes. Your comments are akin to “tabloid trash” themselves so I can only say one thing to someone as narrow-minded and bitter as yourself - go read The Daily Telegraph.
To the NM team, I shall be honest - At times you annoy me and I feel like your blatantly denying the other side of the story, and at times you make me feel connected and in touch. However, you ALWAYS enlighten me, and you ALWAYS provoke thought and discussion in my own mind and in those around me.
So while you shutting down the proverbial presses may be inevitable, I don’t believe it to be necessary to the sanctity of Australian media, and I personally will miss you and your words greatly.
I am in start-up/R&D mode myself and I know how hard it is to find cash, and I applaud you for not jumping on the first promise of money that you received - it would have been very easy to do, but your correct in your assumption that it would be foolhardy. If you have to change who you are and what you do to make money, then walk away, its not worth it and while your bank balance may look healthier you don’t get brownie points for selling your soul.
I wish you all the best, and I hope in time we can both survive long enough to help each other, but if not remember that no matter what happens, one thing can never be taken away from NM - you made us think.
And that is the greatest piece of journalism there is.
Yours sincerely,
Nathan Frick
Executive Director
uGen Media & Consulting
www.ugen.com.au
Frick is a time-waster. He has a link to a website with precisely nothing on it other than half-assed money making ideas. He is the Executive Director of bullshit and the link is little more than spamming.
What I still can’t understand is that if the NM has become such a fertile breeding ground for developing young journalists, then why hasn’t it been given the proper support from the higher education system that it deserves?
And if the NM now fills a niche gap in the publishing market that would otherwise be vacant, then why shouldn’t it also be offered the full support of all levels of government, if only in the interest of cultural and political diversity?
The only reason for NM to fold is because it is already in the throes of an unwinnable defamation case.
Hi Denise,
We’re not sure where you’re going with this one. We aren’t suing anyone for defamation, and no one is suing us. It sounds like you may have your wires crossed on this. Thanks for the kind words though!
Cheers, NM
Hi Australiana,
Your right, the website doesn’t work, I apologise for the link being there - its hosted through Crazy Domains, hence the advertisements.
uGen is a NFP based in the Northern Territory, not a ‘half assed money making idea’, but I’m quite positive you don’t care about anyone other then yourself.
I think we probably know each other from the venom with which you attacked me earlier, but at least I’m not hiding behind a fairly un-creative pseudonym.
At the end of the day, I could refute your idiocy with logic, progressive thinking and general discussion but I think when it comes to people such as yourself (those who would rather hide behind their inflated ego then say what they have to say with their name attached), the only response was the one so eloquently and articulately by Mr. Eltham earlier in this thread:
“Australiana, just F-ck off. If you want to gloat over the demise of NM or my job prospects, do it somewhere else.”
Nathan Frick
Executive Director
uGen
(website pending)
Hmmm, an NFP, with its very own Executive Director, that can’t even organise a basic website with those crazy domain people. We really need more of those, especially ones that specialise in progressive thinking and general discussion.
I wish Australiana would frick off!
Surely as NM draws to an end, people could be charitable! Backstabbing a dying institution seems rather vulgar and in poor taste.
I keep hoping that somehow NM can find a way to continue.
www.dangerouscreation.com
One of the great things about newmatilda is watching two intellectual giants like Nathan Frick (apparently NOT a pseudonym, who knew?) and australiana battle it out in posts long after the circus has moved on.
australiana, whatever the cartoon says, on the internet everyone knows I am a dog.
In respect to Ben Eltham’s job prospects it is clear that he is a smart, principled writer with an eye for analysis and something to say, so given the state of media in this country he is probably fucked. Sorry Ben.
What’s this lie about the SMH fighting the tide of right-wing bullshit? The SMH is the ultimate mercenary, and will take money from anyone who offers it. It has no views of its own apart from the assumption that capitalism is wonderful, and if it was describing someone paddling a canoe, it would say: “He’s turning right!” “He’s turning left!” “He’s turning right!” “He’s turning left!” “He’s turning right!” “He’s turning left!” “He’s turning right!” “He’s turning left!” without ever telling us where he was going.
I read a disturbing piece about newspapers in the LRB in which the author bemoaned the loss of the old-fashioned proprietor who was trying to change the world. I would have expected to find such regret ridiculous, but the drift of the article was that we’re better off when a newspaper has principles it believes in, whether we agree or disagree with them. Now the only principle is to make money, with the result that nearly half the “news” content of the SMH (and a far higher proportion of the Telegraph) is not news but marketing, spin, PR and the like. I don’t trust anything I read in the Herald although Ross Gittins, after his heart attack on the road to Damascus, and Ian Verrender, who doesn’t seem to be embedded with the capitalists he’s writing about, can be enlightening. How long can they last?
I have been saving a bottle of sensational Red for a very wet day.
Where is the wake?
Now that is a plan I can get behind EarnestLee. Name the day and time NM staff, we all owe you a drink.