An Open Discussion: THE END OF JOURNALISM

There is a difference between the end of newspapers and the end of journalism.

Journalism will just move to somewhere else...somewhere were information is faster, freer, more interconnected, and more easily viewed.

Like...say...the Internet?

That's where I get a lot of my information and its (mostly) sound.

Well, as sound as any information can be in a world of 6 billion people, where ideas and passions and philosophies and ideologies constantly clash, lie, contradict, steal, blame, change, and hide at a rate that is almost dizzying to imagine...

Here's something to ponder:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/22/bonuses-to-new-york-times_n_189909.html

<ponders>

Ditto with Zoombie, it's already moved onto the internet and millions of people access news stories from all over the world there. Books won't be going anyway any time soon either. We've seen record sales on some books. Don't worry, there are more readers than ever.

Don Allen said:

I disagree Zoombie, for this reason, the INTERNET and those who report, blog, and comment, do not investigate but merely copy. This isn't journalism it's for all practical purposes "Gossip" I fully admit that some is 100% dead on accurate, but the trend is away from factual reporting to innuendo and politically motivated slant.
True journalism is fading and fading fast because there is no revenue to support it.

Click to expand...

There'll be a transition period.

Just like the last time we moved from gossip to having news papers, the first online reports are going to be...well...gossip and politically motivated slant.

But, just as we had with newspapers, they'll grow an economy and integrity. Just wait till some bright young lad or lass goes, "Hey...I could make money with this internet thing..."

People have already started, with some great results. Just wait till an internet news source hires an actual journalist without having any ties to a paper based news paper. Hey, imagine...NewsTwitter, where you can follow a journalist WHILE he or she experiences a story...

The possibilities of the internet and its information trading is endless!

I don't know how, but if I DID, I'd be running a website journalism thing and not trying to get published.

Don't worry, someone will find a profit in it.

I'm sure people already have, they just have not made big enough splashes cause there are huge media giants looming around and overshadowing everything.

But when those giants die...

I'm going to tout my own horn here; I think I sort of already answered this in a blog post I wrote a week or so ago:

medievalist said:

I've been watching the first two seasons of Babylon 5 of late on Hulu, where they're currently available for free as streaming (Flash-based) video. Babylon 5 an SF show that's no longer aired, but that I'm exceedingly fond of. It's set in 2025, on a space station. In an episode of Season 2 called "Divided Loyalties," at the very start of the episode, two characters meet at a newspaper kiosk. Each carries a printed paper from the previous day, which is deposited in a slot in the kiosk. A digital voice acknowledges the paper to be recycled and crediting their account. The voice then asks questions about the content they wish to be included in that day's paper. They each answer in turn, wait a minute, and a printed, familiarly shaped newspaper drops into a slot at the base of the kiosk.

I remember the first time I saw this; I was delighted. It was cool; it used POD (Print on Demand) from a convenient kiosk, it recycled, and the paper was custom-made to a particular user's preferences. Lately though, I like the idea a lot less. . . .

Click to expand...

You can read the rest, if you're so inclined, here.

Don, I think we are seeing the death of newspapers, and possibly the death of journalism as we know it now.

I think this is a transition period where journalism will have to reinvent how it gets its word out. Not necessarily that bloggers will become the dominate source, but that real journalism is going to have to change to meet the worlds demands.

I think it's going to go on line, and to make money they'll have to be micro transactional. meaning, pay $2 a month to have this sms'd to you or to your inbox. Which is what the papers always were- all the news conviently put in one place for you. and you have to pay for that convienence.

Don Allen said:

The problem Zoombie: Who Pays? Who chooses the story? Who reports on the "little"crimes? Who reports on the black kid in the projects that get killed with a stray bullet?

Click to expand...

And who reports on the planning commission meeting, and discovers that the head of the planning board's boyfriend is a major investor in a proposed development project?

"All politics is local" goes the mantra. The internet will never cover such things.

rugcat said:

"All politics is local" goes the mantra. The internet will never cover such things.

Click to expand...

Err . . . people like me?

People who take their laptops and cell phones to the town meeting, and live blog it?

Who use Twitter to let other locals know that they've live blogged the town meeting? And that we've Googled and researched the planning board's commission, and discovered that there's a huge ethical conflict?

I don't believe we're seeing the death of newspapers in general, only the decline of -large market- newspapers. There was a report on my local news channel stating small papers that report local news are doing well, quite well, because local businesses are willing to spend their advertising dollars there instead. These papers target the markets where small businesses sell their products and services, usually at a reasonable rate. Many of these newspapers are free or available for small change and they feature extras like weekly columns on everything from food to book reviews. I get two in the mail every week and I've been advertising in one of them for years.

I can get state, national and world news off the WWW or television. But if I want to know about what's going on in Carlisle or New Cumberland or Camp Hill, etc., the only way to go is a local press.

ETA: Rugcat sees the potential. There's a huge market on the horizon, right outside your door and down the street.

JOURNALISM
Origin:
1825–35; < F journalisme. See journal, -ism

1. the occupation of reporting, writing, editing, photographing, or broadcasting news or of conducting any news organization as a business.
2. press 1 (def. 31).
3. a course of study preparing students for careers in reporting, writing, and editing for newspapers and magazines.
4. writing that reflects superficial thought and research, a popular slant, and hurried composition, conceived of as exemplifying topical newspaper or popular magazine writing as distinguished from scholarly writing: He calls himself a historian, but his books are mere journalism.

________________________________________


Hmmmmmm, nope I don't think the 'end' of journalism is at hand at all. The word itself is only 170 years old. Technology has always affected the way 'news' is transmitted, so yeah... the rise of the internet and the fall of print newspapers is certainly a landmark or 'watershed' moment in the history of journalism... sure.

Or do you think that the word 'journalism' implies some sort of 'objective' viewpoint? I'm not clear on what it is you're lamenting.

The loss of the 'fairness in broadcasting' laws that Reagan repealed? The commercialization of news? The reapearrance of 'sensationalistic' IE 'Yellow' journalism in the style of Hearst? These elements are always part and parcel of journalism. Think of the 'scandal sheets' in colonial america - they make Fox news seem positively tame in their character assasinations.

I see a rise in 'citizen journalism' - the technical ability for the common man to reach - well, potentially MILLIONS of people for a few dollars. (YOUTUBE) Not possible in the old print model. Is THAT what you want to discuss? Because there certainly is much, much more CRAP to wade through to find the jewels. Yeah, I'll agree to that.

I'm of mixed mind in all of this. (And I WORKED in Radio and Television back in the 70's and 80's - when the fairness in broadcasting doctrine was in effect, and I saw the effects of its repeal)

I would advocate that it is far more important to teach CRITICAL THINKING skills in grade school and junior high these days. So many people accept what they hear and see as 'gospel'... because it's easier than doing the research.

---

For what it's worth - part of what I DO now for a living, is shoot and direct for a local Cable Company. I am actually PRESENT at several different City Council meetings each month - covering the traffic light arguments, the new building codes and the police reports... yeah, they are available for citizens to watch at home LIVE and on reruns during the month. Something that wasn't possible 'back in the old days'.

Journalists will continue to write and report, but until they begin to report facts and stifle the slant, they will continue to be ignored. Journalists are their own worst enemy.

I love(ed) reading newspapers, but instead of subscribing to my usual three, I now get only one and unless it improves, it too will be cancelled. I have no desire to pay for McNews, fluff and opinion.

I would advocate that it is far more important to teach CRITICAL THINKING skills in grade school and junior high these days. So many people accept what they hear and see as 'gospel'... because it's easier than doing the research.

Click to expand...

QFT

I saw an interesting presentation from a Dr. Willard Daggett last year, citing research done with some school districts in the Northeast. Basically showing that a marked improvement in all areas of student performance can be accomplished by teaching them to write creative non-fiction and the critical thinking skills needed to support that writing. It's late, I'll see if I can come up with a link tomorrow. (sorry)

Williebee said:

QFT

I saw an interesting presentation from a Dr. Willard Daggett last year, citing research done with some school districts in the Northeast. Basically showing that a marked improvement in all areas of student performance can be accomplished by teaching them to write creative non-fiction and the critical thinking skills needed to support that writing. It's late, I'll see if I can come up with a link tomorrow. (sorry)

Click to expand...

You can teach it till you're blue in the face, but the fact remains, a great many people don't wish to think critically about things in the first place. It's hard work. They'd rather accept what they're told at face value, assigning slant and bias as *they* percieve it, and don't consider their own bias to be bias at all. If they believe it, it must be true, and/or it doesn't matter, because they're entitled to their opinions. They believe the mere fact that they *have* an opinion gives them credibility, or at least that because they are equals as individuals, that their opinions must be given equal weight.

Perhaps I spiked my coffee with a little too much cynicism, though. And my opinion ain't worth spit, either.

It's just a business like any other. The product or service, and the delivery of it, will change to suit the times or die.

A precious art form and bastion of liberty? The purpose of newspaper and television journalism is to sell advertising.

I prefer the internet to newspapers for one very important reason:

Its possible for everyone to give imput.

Yeah...you're going to get a lot of crap (not that that is anything new), but you also get this marvelously varied picture of the world.

Course, if more people thought critically about life, we'd all be better off. But, I'm in a class specifically designed for critical thinking and I *still* have a bunch of idiots for classmates.

Ah well...