About | Portfolio | Backup | Archives | PayPal Tip Jar | Amazon Tip Jar | Shop@Amazon
Advertising


Search BillHobbs.com
Stats, Etc.


TTLB Ecosystem Stats
Powered by FeedBurner


« GOP Calls on Tennessee Democratic Party to Return Tainted Contributions | Main | They Can't Get No Satisfaction »

September 29, 2006

The Future of News

Michael S. Malone, who writes the "Silicon Insider" column for ABCNews.com, explores the future of news in his newest online column. My favorite part:

A couple years ago I got into a lot of trouble when I used this column to announce the death of newspapers. At the time I said that even as a veteran newspaper reporter I had realized that I didn't really read printed news anymore, that it was so much quicker, more efficient, and ultimately more balanced for me to gather my news by hopscotching around trusted news sources on the Web. My analysis was anecdotal, I admitted, but if a guy who made his living from newspapers didn't read them anymore, why would anybody else?

Well, the reaction was pretty intense. I was accused in trade publications, columns and across the blogosphere of being biased, ignorant and a lousy business reporter - after all, didn't I know that the newspaper business was still highly profitable? Newspapers, I was told, usually in a pedantic tone, would be around for generations to come because they were institutions, because they'd already been around for centuries. Besides, what would mornings be like without a cup of coffee and the paper?

My answer to that: "I dunno, ask anybody under 25."

A few months ago, speaking to a classroom full of journalism students at Tennessee State University - all under 25 - I asked for a show of hands of those who read newspapers. Not one hand went up. Most said they get their news online; fewer said TV. Newspapers are dead - most of them just don't know it yet. The ones that do are rapidly transforming themselves into online multi-media publications that combine text, audio and video. The smart ones are also incorporating reader-generated content, including blogs, video blogs and podcasts.


Comments

I just canceled my newspaper subscription. It was a hard decision for someone who has been reading newspapers for most of his life. Also, I am so conditoned to holding a paper in my hands that I wasn't sure I would be satisfied reading it on line, but ... I am. I used the money I saved to upgrade my Internet connection to the highest speed offered. Sooner or later I had to come into the 21st century.

Posted by: Dick McMichael at September 29, 2006 12:34 PM

I would like to keep my newspaper subscriptions, though the decision is becoming harder and harder to justify. I still read two or three papers a day in print form, though I am poorly served by their imbalance and sins of omission. Oh well. We tried to tell 'em.

By the way, my letters to the editor and guest-column submissions to The Tennessean -- pertaining to immigration issues and related state legislation -- are regularly censored out of the paper. So some of you can stop e-mailing me and demanding I respond to some outrage reported in or committed by The Tennessean. I tried, baby. It ain't gettin' in.

Posted by: Donna Locke at September 29, 2006 4:20 PM

I dunno. I think it'll be like AM radio (or even wired money transfers), it will still survive in some form, just not something we'd recognise today.

Imagine telling a 16 year old teenybopper in the early Sixties that AM radio would only be talk radio and sports shows. And that everyone would have, in essence, their own personal radio station worn around their belt. All hits, no commercials!

Posted by: mike hollihan at September 30, 2006 3:10 PM

Mike, I hate to see the younger generations' lack of interest in newspapers, despite how sorry papers are today. My kids are in their thirties and no longer have subscriptions to any newspaper. My son's last subscription was one I bought for him. He didn't renew it.

My kids say they don't have time to read newspapers. I believe it. One of my kids works two jobs, and the other works 60 to 70 hours a week at his one job and has small children to care for on top of that. They do read some news online, and they've observed their advocate mom's experiences with today's opposite-advocate journalism. My kids don't think they're missing anything.

My daddy used to come in exhausted from his ironworker job every afternoon and immediately sit down and read the local newspaper, front to back. It was important to him. He had regular hours, thanks to the union, and time for such rituals. My kids don't have that at all. Plus, they suffer from information overload in their jobs and don't want to deal with any more.

Posted by: Donna Locke at October 1, 2006 4:58 PM
Post a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!









Remember personal info?






Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):




back to top
Lamar!

Find the Good
and Praise It
I Also Blog At...
button-fcs-blog.gif
Advertising

Archives
Blogroll