Will TV News and Newspapers ever become obsolete?

[caryrae]

I was just thinking about this yesterday, with all the ways we can get our News these days (cell phones, computers, Kindle, verizon Hub, ect) will the News and Newspaper become obsolete in the near or far future? I wonder with all the instant info we can get these days if this would ever happen.

I hope not cause I love sipping on a cup of coffee and going through the Sunday paper on Sunday Mornings.

I remember seeing on the News about one of our big Newspaper Companies having some trouble recently here in the Twin Cities.

[Jared]

Sadly, the newspaper industry likely will not exist in 10 years. Perhaps even five. Even the Boston Globe, one of the nation's premiere papers in one of the most important cities, is in serious danger of closing. The San Francisco Chronicle, the only significant newspaper in the Bay Area, may also shut down by the end of 2010.

I am currently the sports editor of The Daily Orange, the independent student newspaper serving Syracuse University and the surrounding area. I am also interning at MLB.com, where I am covering the New York Yankees this summer. In fact, I am writing this post from the press box at Yankee Stadium, waiting for tonight's game to begin.

Every reporter up here, no matter how successful or significant, fears losing his job any day. Even in New York, the media capital of the world, there is some doubt that any city can support a broadsheet and two tabloids, plus the more local coverage of Newsday, The Journal News and the Star-Ledger. There are six or seven newspapers that cover the Yankees regularly. That is no longer sustainable, and competition will die.

Perhaps written journalism will continue on the Internet, but there is currently no successful business model for mainstream media outlets to survive online. The ad revenue just isn't there. The poor economy will only expedite the demise of my industry.

Hopefully, solid reporting lives on. Otherwise, everyone will one day be for an unfortunate awakening when all the good journalists are out of a job.

[1DisneyNut]

I almost hate to admit it but I am one of those that is the cause of the newspaper and local news demise. I could not tell you the last time I read a newspaper or watched the local news. I get all of my news and weather online. I even keep a weather radar running all the time in one window. lol

[jillluvsdisney]

Sadly, I think I must agree with Jared. I have been a Chicago Tribune subcriber for 15 years.
I just cut my subscription down to Sundays only.
They have cut so much out of the paper now, it's not worh reading anymore. If they can the Travel section on Sundays, that will be the final straw.

I just noticed that most things I read in the paper, I heard about on TV or read on line a day or 2 before. I do like to keep up with news on the internet. I still read many newspapers each day, I just do so on line.

[RedSoxFan]

I hope it doesn't go away too. My son just finished his 3rd year at Syracuse Univ and is majoring in broadcast journalism. It's been his dream to be on ESPN (like a lot of young guys).

[alphamommy]

Both the major newspapers in Detroit recently discontinued home delivery most days of the week. They still print papers that can be purchased from paper boxes, but other than that, everything is online. The paper in Flint is doing the same thing starting June 1.

As much as I hate to see this happen, I admit that I am part of the problem. We don't take the paper anymore at all. If I were going to subscribe again, I would only want Sunday, because I want the weekly store ads.

As for TV news, we only watch it if something significant is happening.

[Ian]

I almost hate to admit it but I am one of those that is the cause of the newspaper and local news demise. I could not tell you the last time I read a newspaper or watched the local news. I get all of my news and weather online. I even keep a weather radar running all the time in one window. lol:ditto:

But listen ... this is no different than the record industry and the struggles they had with the dawn of the digital age. They were very, very slow to adapt and adjust to the new marketplace and it killed them.

Newspapers and other forms of traditional media have also been very, very slow to adapt so their imminent demise is no one's fault but their own.

If I ran a paper, I would have been offering digital subscriptions (at reduced cost) from day 1. It's a no-brainer.

Instead they fumbled around, tried to pretend the Internet didn't exist, made silly business decisions on how to finally use the Internet, and now they're all shocked that people would rather consume news on their timetable without getting black ink all over their hands.

Personally, I will not miss print media. I also couldn't care less if T.V. news broadcasts go the way of the dodo bird. I never watch anyway. It's all a bunch of hype nowadays. They try to manufacture the news instead of just reporting it.

Swine Flu! Imminent blizzards!! The end of mankind as we know it!!! Tune in at 11!! :ack:

[murphy1]

I studied Journalism and love to read books, but we cut our subscription to our paper down to Sunday and then not at all. I either catch the news on CNN or the web. I always wonder if younger people still like to read the paper.

[Jared]

But listen ... this is no different than the record industry and the struggles they had with the dawn of the digital age. They were very, very slow to adapt and adjust to the new marketplace and it killed them.

Newspapers and other forms of traditional media have also been very, very slow to adapt so their imminent demise is no one's fault but their own.

The record industry is a great example. The music executives were very slow to adapt, but they are starting to get it. Their business will be saved and will ultimately thrive online. Though it took a while, they seem to be figuring it out.

You're right about one thing: The mainstream media is killing itself.

[1DisneyNut]

:ditto:

But listen ... this is no different than the record industry and the struggles they had with the dawn of the digital age. They were very, very slow to adapt and adjust to the new marketplace and it killed them.

Newspapers and other forms of traditional media have also been very, very slow to adapt so their imminent demise is no one's fault but their own.

If I ran a paper, I would have been offering digital subscriptions (at reduced cost) from day 1. It's a no-brainer.

Instead they fumbled around, tried to pretend the Internet didn't exist, made silly business decisions on how to finally use the Internet, and now they're all shocked that people would rather consume news on their timetable without getting black ink all over their hands.

Personally, I will not miss print media. I also couldn't care less if T.V. news broadcasts go the way of the dodo bird. I never watch anyway. It's all a bunch of hype nowadays. They try to manufacture the news instead of just reporting it.

Swine Flu! Imminent blizzards!! The end of mankind as we know it!!! Tune in at 11!! :ack:

Good points and I completely agree. The tv news now is just bloated <snip> attempting to grab ratings.

[bicker]

I think some of that is really unfair appraisal. There is no reason to believe that there is any viable business model for either the recording industry or for newspapers, in a digital world. Just because they aren't doing well doesn't mean they aren't doing the best that could be possibly done. And actually, I would put my money on that before I'd sign on to any generalized condemnation of either industry for how they've adapted or failed to do so.

The nature of the digital age is that things will fall by the wayside. My father started out setting type -- by hand. He saw, through his 55 years in the industry, the ascendancy of phototypesetting. Today, as a poorly-paid 74 year old sub-contractor, he sets more type per week than the entire crew of 40 typesetters, proofreaders, layout artists, etc., that worked for him in the 1970s. He and his competitors didn't do anything wrong. They did the best that anyone could have done. The reality is that progress dictated an end to the relevance and value of the service that whole industry provided. That's a natural part of the process.

[Ian]

I'm not talking about the day-to-day workers like typesetters and cameramen.

I'm talking about the strategic visionairies in the industry ... the senior leadership ... CEO's and Executive VP's. The people who are supposed to be 10 years ahead of the curve deciding what direction their industry will take.

These people, in both industries, failed dismally at envisioning what their businesses would look like in a digital world. There were a million simplistic business models they could have (and should have) shifted to a decade ago that would have then financially healthy and wealthy.

The recording industry has finally figured it out to a degree and is starting to stabilize. And the other day, I actually saw a sign that maybe print media is, as well. There is a company out there (not sure which one) that's starting to offer the ability to assemble content of interest into one publication, even though the content is sourced from multiple locations.

For example, you could subscribe to say gardening, baseball, automobiles, and golf stories and each month/week/whatever you'd get a single publication (digital or print, depending on what you pick) that contains articles pertinent to each of your selected interests. So you might get two stories from Better Homes & Gardens, three from SI, one from Car & Driver, etc.

Brilliant!

[Jeff]

: It's all a bunch of hype nowadays. They try to manufacture the news instead of just reporting it.

Swine Flu! Imminent blizzards!! The end of mankind as we know it!!! Tune in at 11!! :ack:

Well said!!

This over hype really bugs me. It's either that or all these "Ophraized" human interest stories or some young reporter trying to make a big pothole sound like the breakdown of civilization as we know it. What happened to the 6 o'clock news where reporters actually reported on the news. Not analyze events, not create scare and scandal, just report!

Our local paper is no better than the local tv news. Our paper now has a "segment" where folks can call in and anonymously comment on anything. They rip public officials, politicians, stores, schools, criticize anything and everyone and do it all without leaving a name. The paper prints this garbage and says it is doing a "service to the community". Come on! Our papers demise can't happen soon enough.

[Ed]

The Orlando Sentinel is an excellent example of the decline of a once-venerable newspaper.

Over the past three or four years, the actual NEWS content of the paper has dwindled down to almost nothing, and the overall page count has dropped to about half of what it used to be. But that hasn't stopped them from raising the street price of the weekday version to $1.00.

Their online version isn't much better. It's not at all uncommon to click on a headline and get redirected to a two or three sentence "story" that is almost invariably followed by "Check back later for more details". But the "more details" seldom materialize. And don't get me started on the extremely poor spelling and grammar, not to mention the blatant factual errors that they present as "news".

It's really no wonder that their parent company is currently in bankruptcy. I wouldn't miss the Sentinel one bit if (or should I say WHEN) they go completely belly-up.

As for TV news, one local station (Channel 6 - CBS) just cut their evening news from two hours to one, and pushed the network news up from 6:30to 7pm - a bone-headed move in this particular market. But at least the TV stations' websites are usually more current and factual than the job done by the Sentinel.

[bicker]

I'm not talking about the day-to-day workers like typesetters and cameramen.Doesn't matter. Even visionaries cannot "envision" a path forward for an industry that progress is necessarily marginalizing. Visionaries likely simply saw the inevitability and moved onto other industries. Again, there is no reason to believe that either recording or newspapers necessarily must have a future.

[bicker]

This over hype really bugs me.Me too, but it is a reflection of what the general public is willing to pay for. They're not going to pay enough to support what many folks in this thread seem to be implying that they'd prefer.

[PirateLover]

I always wonder if younger people still like to read the paper.
Well, I do! I like to sit down and read the paper...but my parents are the ones that buy it, and most likely when I move out I will probably only buy it on special occasions. The Philly papers are in dire straits, too. And as far as the actual stories go, I mainly read the back of the Daily News (sports section) anymore. :(

[pink]

Perhaps written journalism will continue on the Internet, but there is currently no successful business model for mainstream media outlets to survive online. The ad revenue just isn't there. The poor economy will only expedite the demise of my industry.

Hopefully, solid reporting lives on. Otherwise, everyone will one day be for an unfortunate awakening when all the good journalists are out of a job.

The journalism world is transforming, not dissapearing.

I don't believe broadcast news will ever become obsolete, people have becoome too lazy to read a 200 word article, they would rather listen to it on the radio or watch the news.

As for newspapers, those are quickly becoming obsolete, despite the loyal readers who enjoy reading the morning paper. Online journalism is rapidly becoming popular and I believe that is what will adventually overide newspapers.

Journalism is going to one day -POOF- and dissapear. People still want and need to hear what is going on in the world, it will just be in a different way. :mickey:

[A Big Kid]

I would love nothing more than to enjoy a newspaper with my coffee on may patio in the morning, but the newspaper in my town ruined the experience. I was about fed up with their slant on the news and was on the verge of canceling my subscription when they did something that pushed me over the edge. They published a link to all of the city employees' pay for the year.

I had friends and family calling me and commenting on my salary in all kinds of ways, and I didnt like it at all.

The first person in my division called to cancel their subsription, and then handed the phone over to the next person and so on. Before it was all over, 19 of us cancelled.

At a time when the product they produce is causing customers to flee in droves, the solution is not to offer even more of the same; sadly, I dont think the editors will figure that out.

[bicker]

Well, let's look at the from their perspective: Taxpayers are concerned about where their money goes. Here was information that provided some details. Surely workers would prefer to keep their salaries private, but the law, explicitly, requires that that information be public for public employees. (A desire for privacy along these lines is a good reason to refuse to seek employment in the public sector -- not for expecting such privacy when the law provides for transparency.)

Beyond that, I suspect that more people (not me, though) appreciated being provided that information than were horrified by it being provided. And that really points out a major challenge all consumer-facing entities face: Consumers don't all have the same expectations.

In the end, I still think that this is all noise: The newspapers are doomed regardless of what they do or don't do. Nothing -- absolutely nothing -- short of the banning of the Internet, would save newspapers, so quibbling over whether individual things that they do or don't do are good or bad is really missing the point AFAIC.

[drummerboy]

Where are the history buffs when you need them? The term 'yellow journalism' came out a long time ago in response to overhyped news stories and such--that's nothing new. Journalism has not always been the staid, 'only report the news' industry that some people think it's been.

I think there needs to be a separation between the possible demise of the holdable newspaper, which may eventually happen, and the demise of real journalism, which I hope never happens. Whether we get our news from the web alone (talk about trash reporting), or television, or wherever, we'll still need people to gather and distill the facts and report them to us.

Ian, as far as the recording industry--my stepfather took an early retirement from a Columbia Records' production plant many years ago because they were shifting from record pressing to CD production; i.e., keeping up with the times.

[Septbride2002]

:ditto:

But listen ... this is no different than the record industry and the struggles they had with the dawn of the digital age. They were very, very slow to adapt and adjust to the new marketplace and it killed them.

Newspapers and other forms of traditional media have also been very, very slow to adapt so their imminent demise is no one's fault but their own.

If I ran a paper, I would have been offering digital subscriptions (at reduced cost) from day 1. It's a no-brainer.

Instead they fumbled around, tried to pretend the Internet didn't exist, made silly business decisions on how to finally use the Internet, and now they're all shocked that people would rather consume news on their timetable without getting black ink all over their hands.

Personally, I will not miss print media. I also couldn't care less if T.V. news broadcasts go the way of the dodo bird. I never watch anyway. It's all a bunch of hype nowadays. They try to manufacture the news instead of just reporting it.

Swine Flu! Imminent blizzards!! The end of mankind as we know it!!! Tune in at 11!! :ack:


Took the words right out of my mouth.
~Amanda

[Ian]

Where are the history buffs when you need them? The term 'yellow journalism' came out a long time ago in response to overhyped news stories and such--that's nothing new. Journalism has not always been the staid, 'only report the news' industry that some people think it's been.No doubt, but the difference was back then people had to take it because they had no other options.

Not so, now. I can get news from just about a million different sources, all right at my fingertips.

So I can choose to avoid the "overhype" now, while still getting informed.

[drummerboy]

Not so, now. I can get news from just about a million different sources, all right at my fingertips.

Agreed, but we still all need to be careful about which of those millions we choose to rely on.

We still have a need for serious journalists (like Jared :thumbsup:) maybe now more than ever.

[PirateLover]

Agreed, but we still all need to be careful about which of those millions we choose to rely on.

We still have a need for serious journalists (like Jared :thumbsup:) maybe now more than ever.

So true, I just read an article about someone who planted a fake quote on Wikipedia attributed to an artist who had just died, and then watched as serious news organizations across the globe used this fake quote in memorializing the man.

[Ian]

You wanna talk scary? In a recent survey, more health care providers listed Wikipedia as their primary online resource than any other location on the Web.

Even more than WebMD, Mayo Clinic's site, etc.

Now that's scary!