Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Blogger: A future for journalism, but not newspapers

My stepdaughter found this long, but interesting article on the future of newspapers versus the future of journalism.

I didn't take the time to read the comments, but there are 888 of them as of today.
Posted by at
Labels:

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good article, well worth reading.

Small digression:
It frustrates me that for many people talking about the situation, the term "newspapers" can mean a range of things from printed news publication on dead trees to for-profit organization whose main output is news stories and photos. This loose definition of terms hurts the discussion. I've had several people tell me the familiar, "I don't care if newspapers die, because I just get my news off the Internet." For them, newspaper is the dead-tree physical object that lands on their doorsteps. Anybody who "gets" the whole situation realizes that trying to "save newspapers" means saving the reporter-filled institution that provides news coverage in ANY medium -- Web, video, still photo, text story, whatever -- as its primary product/service. Frustrating in large part because much of the general public hears that "newspapers are in trouble" and doesn't think about the deeper meanings behind what that statement means.

22 April, 2009 18:04
Jim of L-Town said...

Amen.

22 April, 2009 21:38

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)