Home > Archive >  2010 >  May >  27

NYT Digital Day conference

Thursday, May 27, 2010 by Dave Winer.

I participated in a private conference yesterday at the NY Times.  

Before continuing, a disclaimer -- what was said by the speakers was off the record. I will respect that. However, as one of the speakers, nothing I said was confidential or secret. In fact most of it has already been said many times, in public, here on Scripting News. So if you were there and want to blog about what I said -- no problem.  

It was fascinating in so many ways, even though at the start of the conference, I tweeted: "I'm reminded why I find conferences hugely mind numbingly boring." That was near the beginning, and it wasn't the fault of any of the speakers.  

Listening to one speaker talk for 45 minutes with no opportunity for interaction, isn't very stimulating. It's like being in class with a teacher who's lecturing. I found a way to deal with it. I sat in a corner and played Angry Birds on my iPad, with the sound turned off, of course. That way my need to interact was taken care of, and the front of my brain could focus on what the speaker was saying, without any interruptions from the rest of me. 

For me, the highlights of the day were the two interviews: one with IBM's Adam Christensen and Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures; and the panel of NY Times bloggers who had an informal blogger-like discussion over lunch.  

Here's what I learned. 

IBM is encouraging their employees to blog. A lot of them do.  

Fred Wilson is a very candid representative of Twitter. I had never seen a company rep answer questions so directly and completely. Much appreciated.  

The panel of NY Times bloggers helped me understand what it means to be a blogger at the Times. I was puzzled by this, because their process didn't seem to me very blogger-like. Although no one said this, I came to believe after listening, and getting to ask a few questions, that the difference between a blogger and a reporter at the Times is that the blogger gets to explore the capabilities of the web much more completely. It's more immersive. There are no length limits. And you can keep revisiting a story as long as there are developments. That's certainly something like what blogging is for me. However, when I finish writing this piece and click the Publish button, only one person will have read it. At the Times they have an editorial process. I have a Buck Stops Here feeling, a rush of adrenaline that if I screw up, it's all mine.  

It's much harder for me to report on the panel I was on. Perhaps they have audio of the discussion. I would welcome a chance to listen to it, or even publish it for others to hear. For me, I got to say everything I've always wanted to say to people from the Times about their role in the future of news.  

Our topic was New Platforms for News. My position was that the Times itself is a new platform for news, and it should be the place you go to, to find out what's new, the same way Google is the place you go to for search. The Times has always been one of the most important places for news on the net, but no one has the position of the default go-to place.  

The Times owns its own printing press, and it must own its distribution system. And in the new way things are done, that means they must share it with the rest of us. That's the tricky part of what the Times must do.  

Lots more to say, and Murphy-willing, it will be said.