Huffington Killed the Print Media Star?

Clay Shirky describes "mass amateurization" as the dramatic upswing in published materials by members of society not typically considered to be professionals in the field. The lines between traditional journalism and amateur journalism have blurred, and due to the proliferation of free internet news, society no longer turns solely to big-market newspapers for their information. Because of this, former kings of the newspaper industry struggle to regain footing in the media landscape.

As Shirky spends a great deal of time discussing the growth of the weblog and its effect on newspapers, I decided to investigate the relationship between the New York Times, the largest local metropolitan newspaper in circulation, and a recognized "newspaper of record" (major newspaper that has a large circulation and whose editorial and news-gathering functions are considered professional and typically authoritative. Source) and The Huffington Post, an aggregated news blog with a liberal slant whose popularity is a legitimate threat to the NYT's online readership.

Although the Huffington Post currently seems too large to be considered a typical weblog, it began as a small online blog (first issue here) without any of the pervasive advertisements seen today. Apart from the article contributions from celebrities, it would be difficult to separate the 2005 HP from any other small news blog. However, since its' inception, the Huffington Post's readership has risen meteorically, whereas NYT.com can't seem to hold it's slight lead. (View current readership chart here)

Isaac Chotiner of The New Republic makes a dramatic, scathing assessment that the Huffington Post is "killing" traditional print media, stating, "The truth is that The Huffington Post is not just supplementing a print media that has long been dominated by newspapers. It is also helping to destroy newspapers. The trials of print media have been explored at length recently in a number of settings, both print and digital, and for good reason. But some tough questions must be asked also about the powerful digital interlopers. For the blogosphere and the news aggregators that dominate cyberspace are completely reliant--completely parasitic--on the very institutions they are driving to bankruptcy. [The Huffington Post] is thoroughly dependent on the reporting that Huffington has spent three decades bashing. Fire up the site on your computer some evening, and see how many of its main stories are from The New York Times or The Washington Post." (Source) Additionally, Martin Nisenholtz, head of digital operations at NYT.com, insinuated that HuffingtonPost.com had violated copyright laws within its' aggregation model, bringing the HuffPo's ethicality into question. (Source)

Sizable accusations aside, I feel the Huffington Post is a successful model acting within copyright and fair use laws, directing readers to the origin points of various sourced stories. (Source) As an aesthetically pleasing, informative compendium of information, the Huffington Post has laid the groundwork for, in Shirky's words, "a new ecosystem of information". Although Shirky aptly conjectures a media landscape where "the majority of weblogs are amateur and will stay amateur", The Huffington Post has expanded beyond the scope of the traditional blog--perhaps in part due to celebrity and political endorsement--but still fosters within its comments section, "a world where participating in the conversation is its own reward." (Source)

Although the Huffington Post is a relatively recent development in our media landscape, I treasure the immediate, enjoyable aggregation method in which to gather my daily news. I still subscribe to the New York Times, as there's undeniable gratification in holding the newspaper in my hands and picking out my favorite sections each day, but now and for the foreseeable future, there's an equal place in my heart for the Huffington Post.