Posts tagged with ‘wall street’

It’s less of a problem since the financial crisis, but the business media are still too cozy with the powerful on Wall Street to do their jobs correctly. The media still fawned over Wall Street stars such as Jamie Dimon at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.; Eliot Spitzer, former New York governor and attorney general, and Jimmy Cayne of Bear Stearns. Why? They all dished tips or dirt on their rivals. Access journalism still dominates the landscape, and you — the reader — suffer for it.

— David Weidner, MarketWatch. So long, suckers — I’m leaving Wall Street.

Today’s honor caps a series of awards for ProPublica this year, including two George Polk Awards, one for radio (with NPR) for our series on brain injuries to our troops, another for television (with Frontline) for our reporting on police violence in New Orleans after Katrina; a National Magazine Award finalist nod for our story on dialysis facilities; the American Society of News Editors Batten Medal for sustained reporting on the New Orleans police story; two Investigative Reporters and Editors Awards, one for the dialysis story and accompanying database, the other for innovation for our “Dollars for Docs” series; and two awards from the Society for News Design for our news applications.

Paul Steiger, Editor in Chief, ProPublica, writing today about the non-profit’s Pulitzer win for National Reporting. ProPublica reporters  Jesse Eisinger and Jake Bernstein won the award for a series on Wall Street bankers who enriched (or tried to) themselves at the expense of their clients and — in some cases — their firms.

This is the first time a digital only series has won the Pulitzer.

Congratulations to an exceptional organization for showing what a non-profit can do in journalism.

Wall Street Doesn't Really Like Content →

Or, at least, not the kind news organizations spend their money on to produce.

Alan D. Mutter writes today that valuations for companies creating cheap content are much higher than those employing professionals.

…let’s look at the huge difference between the value of a digital superstar spending absolutely nothing on content and a struggling legacy media company still employing a small army of reasonably well paid professional journalists.

The companies are Facebook, which needs no further introduction, and McClatchy, the largest publicly held pure-play newspaper publisher in the land.

Although there are many ways to value a company, one of the quickest and easiest is to divide the value of its stock by its sales. So, that is what we’ll do.

Facebook, which had an estimated $2 billion in sales in 2010, was valued at $50 billion earlier this year in a private financing, or fully 25 times its sales. By contrast, McClatchy, whose sales were almost $1.4 billion in 2010, had a market capitalization at the close of trading yesterday of just $372.1 million, or a mere 0.30x of its revenues.

In other words, Facebook, which is filled with a growing abundance of often-trivial user-generated content, is considered by its investors to be 83 times more valuable than McClatchy, which employs hundreds, if not thousands, of journalists

Mutter continues by looking at the Huffington Post’s sale to AOL, Google and some of the content farms.