Robert Cottrell (who curates The Browser) for The Financial Times:

After thousands of diligent appraisals, I can confidently sign off on this excessively simple truth: good writers write good pieces, regardless of subject and regardless of publication. Mediocre writers write mediocre pieces. And nothing at all can rescue a bad writer.

A simple assertion, but put it in context and it becomes more complex and interesting. Think back to the days when print media ruled. Your basic unit of consumption was not the article, nor the writer, but the publication. You bought the publication in the hope or expectation that it would contain good writing. The publisher was the guarantor of quality.

Not anymore. Great thoughts in general.

Also love this idea:

I suspect that the wisest new hire for any long-established newspaper or magazine would be a smart, disruptive archive editor. Why just sit on a mountain of classic content, when you could be digging into it and finding buried treasure?

The extremely short shelf-life of content has always bothered me. For newsy items, it makes sense. For everything else, there should be something like an archive editor to re-surface truly great writing from time to time.

  1. sellingforstartups reblogged this from parislemon
  2. hipchic99 reblogged this from parislemon
  3. arnabocean reblogged this from parislemon and added:
    Lots of people decry the death of the traditional newspaper and the magazine, but I agree that the digital publishing...
  4. bookofdoomed reblogged this from parislemon and added:
    This why no one pays attention to Tina. Too many people are too sick of her crap and her kind of crap. Let alone to pay...
  5. katka-s reblogged this from parislemon and added:
    Love the archive editor idea
  6. inquisitr reblogged this from parislemon
  7. parislemon posted this