TLDR by Inside.com

@adammarx13 great questions.... 1. I love investigative journalism because it's important.... and no one does it no more. Frontline is my favorite. I dream of buying Frontline and running it. I love how they took on the NFL recently... just amazing work. 2. I love podcasting because anyone can do it -- and if you keep doing it you might actually build a huge audience (I did!). 3. I love events as a way of building community. 4. I love email newsletters 5. I love curation So many ways to make journalism work, but it's so noisy and hard right now. You need to also have a growth and high/low (i.e. fun) strategy.... which is what I'm experimenting with here. How fun can we make the news, while sneaking in the important stuff. We'll find out I guess!

@jason @adammarx13 Thanks for taking time to answer! As per your responses.. 1. I agree that investigative journalism has taken a hit in the last decade or so, but also think that there are a lot of promising writers taking on bigger stories right now solo, able to do things basically on their own sweat which would have been so much more difficult to do before without the aid of a big publisher. To me, that's one of the best things I'm seeing lately. 2. Discovered the same dynamic on my college radio show (arguably a form of podcasting)! (Smaller audience too, I assume ha). 3. This is a big thing for me, and I could see it was for you as well. I was at LAUNCH back in March and really liked the way you ran your interviews, particularly your ones with Fred Wilson and Chris Sacca. Definitely an extension of the dynamic you have on your podcasts (complete with riffing!) which made them equally as entertaining as informative. Interesting approach regarding "fun" (but informative" news; I'll be interested to see how this works out, especially as it begins (hopefully) to carve out its own brand beside Inside. Thanks again for the AMA (and for the patince at a long set of questions)!

@svenle that's a great idea...... will put it on the trello board.

@svenle That's a really cool idea. We've been playing with a few toggle ideas...but time based hasn't come up. I'll add that to the list.

@raydawg88 @jason Thanks guys!!! Would be awesome. After actively testing it for a day I have to deactivate the plugin. It's too much energy to "force-focus", especially in research phases. Which means you actually did a great job with this - tempted to click an article every time I'm opening a new tab... ;)

@svenle Be sure and grab our iOS app if you're on an iPhone so you can still stay up on the news with TLDR.

@raydawg88 @svenle Will definitely do so!

@spinoodle in the main @inside app you can set preferences and the alerts are absurdly granular. Folks don't want to set things up.... so, i think we are going to try just being AWESOME on an editorial basis for a year, and then maybe add in a little machine learning (provided this gets traction).

@spinoodle Curious...are there any topics/preferences you're feeling like are missing? Obviously we want to make sure everyone gets what they want from this type of product.

@jacksondahl I believe it can change, definitely. All you need to do is to speak to them in their own language, and the way they want their news handed to them. Nothing lengthy, nothing complicated. I've been doing this with my own newsletter whathappenedlastweek.com and most of my subscribers (3000+) are millenials.

@jacksondahl young people today look at news as entertainment, and I think they are so savvy/cynical they assume that it's all bought/covert advertising. So, it will take time for Gen-Y and Gen-C to look at the news and say "hey, this is important and we should trust it." of course, the news providers have to be trustworthy, make significant investments and figure out a way to operate in a world where advertising has been, largely, commoditized by platforms. It's really hard to get a premium CPM when the folks at Twitter and Facebook can sell any publishers audience -- and pay them nothing! you can literally advertise to the @nytimes and @engadget followers on Facebook and Twitter and give those publications NOTHING. ZERO. How crazy is that? How were they able to sneak that in?!?!

@jason your comment about people/brands being able to advertise directly to NY Times or Engadget Followers on Facebook and Twitter intrigued me as I had never really thought about the effects of advertising on Facebook/Twitter from that point of view. I obviously understood the ability to get very granular with your targeting but then never considered that you are essentially getting the benefit of all the effort that the NY times (or some other specific brand/business) took to develop a following within that particular niche you wish to target. Essentially you can get the benefit of what could potentially costs tens (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars to advertise on these mastheads for cents on the dollar/$'s per click via Facebook/Twitter. While that's great for the person trying to reach that audience it does seem unfair on the part of the publisher. While they are losing direct traffic to their publication (especially with the likes of Facebook instant articles) they are also getting hit over the head by not receiving any share of the revenue that they essentially helped cultivate by having an audience that someone is interested in reaching. Perhaps this is an area where another social app/network could gain a foothold (assuming of course they reach a certain level of critical mass first) by giving publishers some level of control and reward for their efforts. Perhaps under a fairer model generic targeting of users by age, sex, location, education level, etc allows the platform to maintain 100% revenue, whereas if an advertiser specifically opted to target followers of someone like the New York Times or Engadget then those brands get a % share of the ad revenue. Very interesting insight and definitely something I will research in more depth given the current project I am working on. BTW first app I opened this morning for my news hit over breakfast was TL;DR

@belsito I rarely travel for speaking gigs... i have so much going on in NorCal. The exceptions are: a) a friend/partner like Tyler/IBM/Troy Carter (today) asks me to help their event, b) the audience for my talk is 2x bigger than my own stage (which is 2,500+ folks at LaunchFestival.com). otherwise, it's just too much time/effort for too low of payoff for my audience/teams. my appearances are a primary resource to @inside and @launch teams, so we have to think "does this get us a bigger push/help more founders than doing another episode of This Week in Startups?" etc. when i was in my 20s and 30s i took every speaking gig... which is how i got myself into this mess!!! :-p

@jason @belsito Makes sense! But I had to ask. If you have solid recommendations on speakers for this year, let me know. Really came hard with Industry 2015. Nir Eyal. Trevor Owens. Mina Radharsihnan. A dozen more. It was great.

@belsito Mike - having just got off the high of attending Launch Scale pretty much anyone on the agenda there would appear to be a fit for Industry 2016, including a number of 20-30 year old founders. If there's something specific (topic/role) you're looking for I'd be happy to make a reco from what we heard out there. http://www.launchscale.net/agenda/

@seysconstantijn we met through mutual friends like David Sacks and Adeo Ressi 10+ years ago now; he's a really special guy and I care about him a lot. He pushes himself so hard, which is obvious, but he's also a great father and wildly supportive friend. Super loyal, like Mark Cuban and David Sacks and Chamath. He's done so many favors for so many of his friends that no one hears about... and the dude is so slammed right now. he's a really good person and he's the probably the best entrepreneur i've met in my entire life -- and i've met them all (including gates and Jobs).

@shauntrennery patch was too many cities done poorly.... they should have done only 10 cities, but done them 50x better and they would have had a shot at replacing the local publications. you never SCALE before you PERFECT something.... patch never hired a great editor or nailed a city.... so, they spent a ton of money doing a modest job--and no one noticed. classic mistake in the "age of attention"