There was a lot happening at the inaugural DealBook conference on Wednesday - and much of it was undeniably impressive.
Here is what the invitation-only conference had going for it: Big Wall Street names, flashy graphics, edgy Global Chill music, weighty discussions of economic challenges, a few good laughs and even some news tidbits. And, with the pricey tickets and the all-platforms-blazing corporate sponsorships, the event brought in plenty of much-needed revenue for The Times.
Here is what the conference did not have going for it: A great deal of distance between sources and those who cover them - something traditionally thought to be a bedrock journalistic idea.
I stopped in a couple of times at TheTimesCenter, and caught the Dealbook editor in chief Andrew Ross Sorkin‘ s interview with the Goldman Sachs chief executive Lloyd C. Blankfein, as well as a session with the economist and columnist Paul Krugman. Mr. Krugman, of course, is not only a Nobel laureate, but also a rock star among the wonkish set; his presence lent the event gravitas and credibility. (One of his first questions from the audience came from a woman who thanked him effusively for his presence and gushed that she felt like “a 13-year-old at a Justin Bieber concert.â€)
DealBook â€" a blog and print section dedicated to coverage of mergers and acquisitions and other related subjects - is something of an oddity at The Times. A rainmaker for the company, it has garnered its share of critics who see it as too soft on its sources.
Matt Taibbi at Rolling Stone is a particularly harsh critic, portraying Mr. Sorkin as allowing those he sees as Wall Street villains to get off easy for wrecking America's economy over the past decade. (Indeed, during his Wednesday chat, Mr. Blankfein spoke the inevitable words “mistakes were made†â€" Wall Street's idea of a mea culpa.)
More than anything, DealBook is one of those creatures of 21st-century journalism â€" as much about “brand†as anything else.
The conference did a great deal to burnish the DealBook brand. At one point, looking at the stage from the audience, I saw seven DealBook logos staring back at me.
It also produced revenue. BlackBerry was the conference's “founding sponsor,†and its advertising deal put it on every platform in sight. Interestingly, BlackBerry's participation suggested that it di dn't hold a grudge for the article The Times did just a couple of months ago, making fun of those who still use BlackBerry devices instead of hipper alternatives like the iPhone.
Such sponsorships are another creature of 21st-century newspapering, eroding the sharp line between advertising and editorial content.
I talked on Thursday with Mr. Sorkin, who said he was pleased with the day.
“I consider it live journalism, and I felt that some headlines came out of it,†he said. (The event was live-blogged on The Times's Web site, which also offered a live webcast.) He mentioned, particularly, the optimism of Mr. Blankfein and others about the likelihood of a resolution to the so-called fiscal cliff, and the Bridgewater Associates founder Ray Dali o's ideas about a bond bubble.
Ultimately, though, “it was more about the richness of the discussion,†Mr. Sorkin said.
Was the event too chummy, too clubby, and is DealBook itself that way, too?
“I don't think there's any truth to that,†Mr. Sorkin said. “We ask very pointed questions.â€
In its first event of this kind, The Times put together a smooth, impressive and star-studded day, and it made none of the clumsy errors that The Los Angeles Times did in its Staples Center debacle or The Washington Post in its aborted “Salongate†plans.
But given the lunchtime rollout of a new Blackberry device, the overall friendly questioning of prominent newsmakers, the reception afterward â€" featuring wine, hors d'oeuvres and the incessant rubbing of journalistic and corporate elbows - the word “adversarial†did not come to mind. Nor did the word “watchdog.â€
Most audience members paid handsomely to be “invited†â€" most ti ckets were $1,500, others less. Given that they were coming to see people like Mr. Blankfein - other big names were the JPMorgan Chase chairman Jamie Dimon and the Google chairman Eric Schmidt â€" The Times's indebtedness to these sources lurks in the shadows. (The participants were not paid for their appearances.)
I asked Gerald Marzorati, the editor who organized the event, about that.
“I can understand that question, but I see no evidence of a problem,†he said, other than one of “the optics†â€" that is, the appearance as opposed to reality. Once on stage, he noted, the journalists did their part admirably and The Times's news coverage of the participants has been tough-minded.
In the end, what's in it for the audience is “a great show and the chance to mingle with one another,†Mr. Marzorati said. What's in it for the headliners is “not about cozying up to Times journalists, but the ability to talk about things other than their day jobs†â€" like matters of public policy.
Mr. Marzorati noted that with every innovation in Times history â€" whether starting new features sections three decades ago, or bringing the statistics guru Nate Silver on board recently - “there are always people who say: ‘My God, you can't do that. It's not us.' †In time, the ventures are well accepted.
It's 2012, and newspaper companies need radical change, including new ways of finding the revenue to support their journalism. The old model is broken and The Times is right to look for new solutions. Still, some aspects of this particular solution can't help but make me a little queasy.
