Being a journalist means being a marketer too?

Just finished 'The End of Journalism as Usual' by Mark Briggs in the Nieman Reports, and he makes a fascinating point about the future of journalism.

He references the blog Techcrunch and says that after just two years their coverage of technology has eclipsed the readership of similar coverage by the New York Times and bay area news outlets because they focused on their marketable content; directed it at a market segment that wanted it, and sold advertising to that market.

To some journalists the idea of thinking of targeted content and marketing detracts from the purity and truth-seeking that brought them in to journalism in the first place. However, Briggs issues a response to that line of thinking:

Digital entrepreneur Elizabeth Osder visited the University of Southern California last fall and spoke frankly to journalism students about this new environment, according to a summary posted by Online Journalism Review. She presented the following recipe for entrepreneurial journalism:

Start with the impact you want to have. Figure out what audience you need to assemble to have that impact and what kind of content is needed to do that. Then price it out: How much money do you need to do it?

After one student complained that this felt too much like business school, Osder defended the new approach as bringing to them a necessary discipline. “It forces you to be relevant and useful versus arrogant and entitled,” Osder replied.

What do you think? Do you think learning the additional skills required to make being a journalist a viable business is necessary, or does it take away from the purity of the job?