Video killed the radio star. Internet like wise, is killing the newspaper, and most of the traditional medias for news and entertainment. We can see it already beginning to happen. The only question I can think of is, does a newspaper bother printing the story about them going out of business?I would hope for the sake of common sense they would simply post such information on their website. While newspaper companies like the Philadelphia inquirer and the Detroit Journal are now dealing with extreme debt, sympathy seems to be undeserved. The financial lose of these newspapers is a direct result from failing to change with the times and the nature of the times. In a historic recession, what can be obtained for free does not make a profitable product.
And now there is a 4 newspapers who have filed for chapter 11. Circumstantially, chapter 11's success rate is estimated to be around 10%. This means we have bankruptcy protection that works worse than our last president. Given the state of the economy and rapid evolution of how our society gets information, these companies will soon be filing for chapter 13. Or going out of business completely.
It seems like the internet is Wal-Mart and local newspapers are "ma and pa" shops. Why will people pay extra when they can get everything they need from one place? It seems that even the whole art of journalism may be being abandoned. A grim thought for the 50,000 employed in the field and thousands of students trying to emerge in to the field.
While the future of this is impossible to tell, as we are still dealing with the slow downhill-decay, there is exciting possibilities for a new-era of news media. It seems that these companies will continue to suffer loses until one comes up with a genius marketing idea to make money in the vast and mostly free world of the web, allowing the others to follow. Although, there is another factor here that is a driving force in this phenomenon. What news do people really want to hear about? Once people in every nation begin blogging or twittering(if that obnoxious fad lasts), this would mean the end of the need for reporters. It seems investigative reporting is the only kind that people will still yearn for.
Regardless of what becomes of the demand, there is a downsizing coming. While this is a lose of an old traditional staple in American cities, it is not tragic. It is simply what happens when people try to exploit a basic need of society. There are hundreds of newspapers in any given urban city, ranging from small bohemian papers to mainstream papers. Here in Milwaukee, I see dozens of papers all focused slightly on a different topic, and I do not pick up any one of them. Even the ones that appeal to my interest. This is because I can find what I'm looking for, or just browse, much faster and more effectively on the internet. Everyone knows this, so why are there still so many papers? The answer is because, as it has been for over a century, newspapers are not made to serve the public, but to fulfill our own desire to be what we are taught "journalist" and "editors" are suppose to be. People want to be journalist and writers, the only problem is that society doesn't really have much a need for them anymore.
The comparison you made between Wal-Mart and the internet was perfect! That analogy makes perfect sense and it really gives meaning to what this situation is really about. It is true you can get almost everything and more from the internet, they have replaced newspapers, magazines, catalogs. Remember when buying things from catalogs and having them show up on our doorstep was cool? Well now we can get that from the internet as well! The thing is, we do still see all of these things, and some (but not a lot) of people use them to their efficiency.
ReplyDeleteI do have to disagree with you about how blogging and twittering will replace the news. Although they are becoming huge hits, people still like to receive information from a reliable source. Some no-namer from Kansas will absolutely not tell me my news! It is just too early to tell what exactly will happen with journalism. I honestly do not think newspapers will not be going anywhere for a while, people are still reading books when there are millions of movies to choose from. I believe it is the comfort that people have when they can get away from their computers and all its distractions. Maybe in future generations when our grandparents and parents and maybe even we are gone will newspapers vanish for good, but I believe they will be around for a while, just like ma and pop shops.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs the rise of citizen journalism continues to soar, more average-everyday-people are becoming viable sources. Audience standards have increased and Joe-schmoe won't be able to easily out-run the process of fact checking for much longer. Found on the Huffington Post website is a list of guidelines that the website has set for their bloggers. While citizens expand their day to day lives on the web, a greater sense of community as been created through the usage of these blogs. The beginning of Professor Micheal Newman's lectured yesterday opened with a quote from Andy Warhol. "In the future, everybody will have 15 minutes of fame." Professor Newman continued his class by stating the significance of blogging. "During these times, it's as though everybody is famous to 15 people." Newman describe posts and other interactive parts of a blog as "experiences" that had potential to be special to virtual community members across the board. I couldn't agree more. Although the blog may not appeal to the masses, "moments" shared on the web that may hold a great sense of importance to today's virtual communities.
ReplyDeleteI'd love to major in Print Journalism, but fear that the profession is soon to be left to the dust, as well. As for the entire field, I believe that the transfer of mediums has given us hope. Being an accessible tool, the Internet provides the masses a better opportunity to stay informed and pick up on cultural trends from around the world. The specific type of journalism I plan to pursue is Profile Journalism. As our world's connectedness grows, I believe that more people will be interested in the personal lives of many more than now. The Internet shines hope on my dream career.
You make some really valid points here. I'm not sure what is worse- watching these small newspapers go out of business, or watching them flounder, while they go out of business. Your remark about the 10% success rate of those that file chapter 11, was hilarious. Yes, this is Bush's fault. I'm far more content just blaming this on Bush. Really, I am. I'd rather believe he is the root cause of all evil, than to think America just doesn't care about its important institutions, like the newspaper. -Patrick
ReplyDeleteI love your points about newspapers actually reporting on what's happening to them. People like my dad who's been on the internet, oh, twice, might never think newspapers are becoming obsolete. Thankfully, I think broadcast news has done a decent job reporting on it, or the exact people who would find this news so devastating wouldn't even know.
ReplyDeleteTwittering and blogging, I feel, are too different to consider that both would mean the end of the news as we know it. I still don't have a clue why Twitter is so popular, but I guess, to each his own. I do know that the Hudson river crash was actually first reported by someone on Twitter, though. If anything, it seems Twitter could become a new kind of Breaking News and blogging, the new Op-Ed. I was surprised with your assertion that whatever happens now, it is'nt really tragic. Compared to your, I would say very astute, graphic with the Statue of Liberty, I would have thought you were more worried about how our democracy is tied into our newspapers.