"The medium is not the message. The messages are the medium." - David Carr, on Twitter and other new media. Actually the best bit of this is a clip from a Carr appearance on The Colbert Show, when Stephen says, "You are a former crack addict, and you are a reporter for the New York Times. Which of these two do you think is more damaging to society?" Good but not great doc. Too scattershot.
Astounding documentary - mostly because, even after acknowledging the threat to their future, the Times still doesn't get it. So mired in their own history, they fail to grasp the extent of change despite their acceptance that it's happening. The focus on David Carr - a updated version of the obnoxious/crusty/arrogant/confident stereotype cobbled together from decades of newsroom movies and TV - was regrettable .
Find the film only scratches the surface in its quest to define modern media's effect on the decline and possible extinction of print journalism. By spending a fair amount of its runtime on the fallout/effect of the wikileaks episodes it loses its focus though some may argue that this is the episode that proves the value of the institution. Fascinating, reflective but in the end unsatisfying.
Excellent documentary about the impact of the internet, blogs and new media on print publications, seen throw the eyes of a household name in the world of journals. Despite of depending a little too much on the "coolness" of David Carr, it touches some inevitable questions about the role of journalists and how they are dealing with this new Era when (apparently) anyone can do their job.
Interesting documentary about The New York Times. On second thought, it was more about David Carr, popular NYT journalist and couple other central figures. Anyway, one can have decent picture about daily routines in one of the worlds biggest (or biggest?) daily newspaper from this film. Interesting enough.
Interesting personalities abound here (particularly, of course, erstwhile Carpetbagger David Carr), and it's sorta fun to see the interior of the Times' ridiculous office and its people engaged in deadline reporting. However, the film has a hard time sticking to its theme of survival for the paper, and expends too much energy flitting between vaguely related topics.
Fascinating documentary follows a year behind the scenes at the New York Times. Takes a hard look at the decline of print media, but also reminds us why the NYT is the venerable, vital institution that it still is today. It may be in transition, but the film finds journalism alive and well at the NYT, and provides a compelling look at what makes them tick. An elegy and a tribute all in one.
This is a fine documentary but it does feel very much on the surface. The conflicts and tensions at NY Times in these turbulent times for the publishing press feels muted. None of the reporters, editors or other staff seem to be being themselves on the camera, they all seem to have the shine of people who have been well versed in public relations. A film that was willing to create more waves would have been better.
Rossi provides a very interesting take on a widely discussed problematic. He spent 14 months with these reporters and he admitted to feel a connection to his "stars" but he still maintains a notable objectiveness towards the conflict digital vs print. The film doesn't offer answers, it never tries to, but it poses the right and difficult questions. Also, it provides fascinating info about new media