I remember when people used to watch the 5 o'clock news or read the newspaper to get the "inside" scoop of whatever was the hot topic. These days, however, both seem to have taken a very far backseat to the Internet. Quite honestly, it makes sense. Why pay for a newspaper service when you can get it online. While online services cost, it is a fee most people are already paying. Fees aside, look at the convenience. People can access the "scoop" 24-7 on the internet. There is no waiting till the 5 o'clock news comes on or waiting until the paper is delivered.
All the convenience and ease aside, the internet is killing traditional journalism and media. The sales of newspapers have decreased. According to "The News Media: An Annual Report on Journalism, Newspapers: Summary Essay" by Rick Edmunds, over the last 3 years circulation has decreased, advertising revenues fell 43%, and newsrooms shrunk by 25%. These aren't statistics of a thriving business.
Unfortunately, the internet will only continue to grow and those who do enjoy traditional media will pass, leaving behind a generation thirsty for immediate gratification whether it is factual in nature or not. So in keeping with the times, traditional media outlets need to jump on board the gravy train so to speak and find a profit in the distribution of news on the web. While im all for the saying the "oldies but goodies" , the oldies are going to have to adapt to "stay alive."
Ooh, you really think that the new internet money looks like a 'gravy train' to existing newspapers that are used to making huge profits? I do not think that will happen.
ReplyDeleteOver the next decade, the old will pass and the new, including young journalists and those fortunate enough to adapt in time. I think only the newspapers with the strongest backing (external funds) will survive to see profits on the other side.
You have a point about the convenience factor. One thing I haven't seen mentioned much in this debate: e-readers and tablets. It's now easy to send RSS feeds of news directly to those devices, where we can view them at our leisure and location of choice. That seems a lot easier to me than going out and picking up a paper.
ReplyDeleteWhat gives me confidence for journalism is my belief in the inherent value of information. I think people will always be willing to pay to get the best knowledge, even if the cost becomes even more watered down and we have to go through some restructuring-induced blackouts to get there.
iceberg makes good points. e-readers and tablets...i think people will always be willing to pay for the better product and knowledge also.
ReplyDeletemore so, journalism wont die, its only gonna transfer to digital means. Someone has to write those articles online and keep up with those blogs and stuff. and im not just talking about you and i, i'm talking about WSJ and Time and etc...they still will be looking for legitimate creative & amazing writers.
personally i feel that a traditional paper will be around but obviously it will be scarce considering everything is going digital. but as you mentioned ..whoever wants a traditional printed paper will go to that extent to find one, and once they dont, theyll have to get over it. thats that. but i really think personalized printing will be available for as long as there is some decent market for it.
"to get the 'inside' scoop of whatever was the hot topic." This made me think about how news on the internet makes it harder for journalists to set an agenda. If people aren't reading the same one newspaper everyday, they aren't being hit over the head with what that newspaper thinks is important. People now have virtually unlimited outlets to go to get their news, and everyone can be more particular about what they read. If everyone in the same town nowadays isn't getting their news from the same 1-2 papers, it makes sense that public opinion will be more stratified.
ReplyDelete