As I continue to do this project, I'm still trying to find the most useful information. My topic is so broad and I often get confused about what I'm actually going to be talking about. I'm still trying to find my topic title and I'm trying to narrow down exactly what I'll be presenting to the class. As I was using digg.com, a web tool I'll be using for my project, I came across an article called "Why It's Okay For Newspapers To Die." The title jumped out at me because all you see are articles about what newspapers are doing to save themselves. Not only does this article give a different perspective, but the comments on the article are also really helpful.
In the article written by Sonia Arison, I immediately noticed the caption under the heading because it narrowed down the article in a few sentences. It simply stated:
"The transition that's taking place in the news publishing industry -- from print to online -- is a healthy step in technology-driven evolution, though there will undoubtedly be some short-term pain. The loss of print newspapers is akin to the loss of the horse and buggy. The Internet offers the potential for broader and deeper news reporting."
I liked how it related the transition to the loss of horse carriages. Yes, it was a big change, but it was definitly for the better. There is some "short term pain," like the loss of jobs for the newspapers. Personally, my theory is that you will always need someone to write the news.
As I stated in the title of my blog, the author mentions this process by calling it "Creative Destruction." Creative Destruction is known as "the process by which a new technology or structure replaces the old and builds a new infrastructure." The author of the article believes that a situation like this won't go down without a fight, relating it to the government bailing out automobiles. Some say that people are panicing to the thought of not having the news in print anymore, and others are praising the fact that the news is getting out faster.
There is more to the article, but I feel like the comments on the article were much more important. One commenter made an interesting point saying that newspapers aren't the problem but journalism itself. The commenter stated that too many forms of journalism are being created and it is getting confusing for people choosing their college major. One commenter mentioned that they are just going to miss holding the hard copy with a cup of coffee in the morning. People are also saying that the quality of journalism is going down becuase the importance of the media is how fast you get it out, not the quality of the writing.
I highly recommend reading the comments on that article because they have really good points. I like to hear normal peoples point of view on the issue. This article gave me new ideas for my research paper and I'm definitley going to refer to those comments for more ideas.
Kelly: Very interesting post and a good article. There was one part that struck me. She says in the article that "No one disputes that a strong media is important for democracy, but the core issue is what that media should look like." That seems to be the core issue with your topic.
ReplyDeleteWith this change, this "creative destruction," what does it mean for the future of newsgathering and reporting? How will "news" be different, not just how will it be presented differently?
Kelly: Here is an article you might find helpful and/or interesting:
ReplyDeletehttp://mashable.com/2009/12/11/programmer-journalists/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Mashable+(Mashable)&utm_content=Google+Reader