There has been so much high-profile news about Newspapers going under lately that he probably thought he could capitalize on the emotional sentiment that most people have about it.
There's no doubt that the rise of the net has hurt the newspaper business as it's existed in the past. It's 3 major revenue streams (Advertising, Classifieds and Subscriptions, in that order) have all been eroded to various degrees.
And it's really a terrible situation because they did what they were supposed to do: They have diversified their revenue. It just so happens that the internet is such a sea change in content distribution that it invalidated all 3 major revenue streams in one felt swoop.
The BS from this Sony guy, though, is that he compares it to how the internet has hurt Sony's music biz. I "pirate" content with the best of them but I do agree that it's not cool to take from artists for free. Tho I don't mind so much because Artists have lost their way for so long and have gotten so abused by "The Biz" for so long that I'm not taking $15 out of the pocket of The Boss when I download his new CD, I take maybe $1. Or less.
No doubt it's Sony (et al)'s fault for failing to bend to the new realities of the market. But that's the cause-in-fact. The proximate cause of their troubles is people downloading unlicensed content.
That's far from the story of the Newspaper Business. They chose to give away their content (more or less) for free and try to monetize with online advertising. The proximate cause of their revenue drop is giving away their content. The cause-in-fact is a changing distribution system (the internet).
He's muddling the issue because any intellectually honest person knows he hasn't a leg to stand on. That he's whining because his money tree is dying a slow death.
