The demise of the newspaper has been a shock to many people because of the fact that many have closed, and on top of that, many people have been laid off because of how badly newspapers have been doing. “Good Journalism is critical to the health of our democracy,” President Obama recently stated. (Reagan). http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/newspaper-48230-critical-appreciate.html. In any democracy, journalism is important because without it, no one knows what is happening around them, and it is for this reason that the newspaper was so successful in its time, because it was the best, and only source to distribute, spread, and communicate news with everyone, all at once.
With the economy being the way it is, this has caused a significant number of problems for many, if not all journalists and would-be journalists. With some of the most renowned newspapers going bankrupt and folding, that does not leave much room for hope among journalists. One of the biggest problems that is occurring is the lack of jobs for print journalists, considering there are very few major newspapers that are hiring, or that are even around. Currently, some of the top newspapers are running the risk of folding, those being, “The Philadelphia Daily News,” “The Minnesota Star Tribune,” “The Boston Globe,” and “The Chicago Sun-Times,” to name a few. (For more details click on the link: "http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1883785-2,00.html"
Another major problem has to do with WHY the newspaper demised. Of course, the economy is partially to blame for this, considering it is at an all time low at this point. However, although it would be so much easier to blame the economy, the newspapers themselves need to shoulder some of the blame too. If all the major newspapers had not been so quick to change everything by going online, then there is a good chance that the newspaper would still be around. Many newspapers, both major ones and minor ones alike, decided to continue with their traditional newspapers, but to also post all their articles online, and for free at that. As a consumer would probably see it, even though newspapers are relatively cheap, if the same material can be read online, and on top of that for free, then what is the need to go out and purchase a traditional newspaper. According to About.com, “Opinions abound as to what newspapers must do to survive. Many say papers must start charging for their web content in order to support print issues. Others say printed papers will soon go the way of the Studebaker and that newspapers are destined to become online-only entities.” (http://journalism.about.com/od/trends/a/dyingpapers.htm) If newspapers had not turned things over to the internet, or even if they had decided to charge people for reading articles online, newspapers would have still had a fairly large presence. Unfortunately, that is not the case anymore and it is really only a matter of time before traditional newspapers are unavailable
I completely agree with the paragraph about the demise of the newspaper being partially at the fault of the newspaper itself. While trying to "keep up with the times", the newspapers of today are essentially shooting themselves in the foot. Newspaper print subscriptions cost the consumer money, while the same news is available online for free. I don't know if the newspaper corporations expected people to still want to subscribe, but clearly that idea backfired. An idea would be to offer online news at a small annual or monthly fee. Otherwise, the only income off online news is from advertising. Some newspapers use this to their advantage and charge more for online advertising, but there are still some newspapers clinging to life in the print world.
ReplyDeleteHey, I'm posting here, because this blog isn't letting me start a new blog post.
ReplyDeleteSo, I'm cruising through the internet for this assignment and I come across "veteran technology journalist" (internet journalist) Paul Gillin's website and article "http://paulgillin.com/gillin/how-the-coming-newspaper-industry-collapse-will-reinvent-journalism/", concerning the demise of the newspaper. He talks about how expensive newspapers are, with their staffs of journalists and editors, printing costs, ink costs, etc. And for quite some time until the nineties, newspapers held control of the media market with advertisements and driving out smaller newspapers.
Well, with the development and acceptance of the internet, blogs and internet news sites that rely on pretty much anyone's contribution to the article are picking up the pace in the media race. Fark.com, an online "news aggregator" receives a reported 40 million page views a month and is grossing about 10 million dollars in revenue. Other online blogs or sites that rip news off of newspaper websites are hardly paying any money for their fame and fortune because they are dealing with a medium that doesn't involve heavy production costs or costs in obtaining their news. They have an army of enthusiasts and readers that can add content just like wikipedia articles. There's no need for accuracy like there is with newspapers, because corrections are left up to the readers.
Eric Alterman, in a New Yorker article (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/03/31/080331fa_fact_alterman) comments on how the upcoming blobs and reader generating news websites are the coming of a new democratic media age. Now, news won't be handled solely by an editor and his/her team of journalists. rather, communities will take part in a new democratic participation of news. Blogs present a new "marketplace" of ideas that newspaper never had, save for the few letters to the editor. there may be less accuracy, but that just encourages more people to go about fact finding and correcting the mistake.
I find the advent of the blog/news aggregator websites to be fascinating and very important to the democratic process. I am concerned that blogs won't be as comprehensive with their reporting or fact finding, but possibly if there could be a central team of fact finders in a given news website, then we can attain the excellent news finding that newspapers are dominating. The internet is much faster updated, cheaper, and easier to handle than a clunky, once a day, newspaper.
Jeremey Kowalski
Milwaukee Correspondent