How will you get your news in 10 years?

[BenGarrett]

Y'all gripe about the news media all the time. So let's hear it: Are newspapers doomed?

I think they are. The Newspaper Association of America is reporting that circulation dropped nationwide by 3.2% in the last six months. Of course part of that can be blamed on somewhat intangible reasons (for example, the San Francisco Chronicle's circulation fell 15% due to the paper eliminating a supplemental advertising trader). But there's little doubt that newspapers' circulation is dropping, at least on a national level, and those papers are struggling to stay out of the red, financially.

I'm in the middle of a book, News is a Verb, by Pete Hammill. Hammill has been editor-in-chief at both the New York Post and the Daily News. He does a good job of pointing out the decline of newspapers. Basically, he says, newspapers are doomed. I tend to agree. I think we're at the beginning of a revolution in the way news is presented, a revolution that will ultimately result in folks figuring out what all of us here have already figured out: That the Internet is a great source for news. Obviously the 'Net is already being utilized, but what we're seeing right now are Internet news sources that are merely supplementing their companies' print or televized editions. The few exceptions, such as breittbart.com, are merely relaying whatever comes off the wire services. Eventually, we'll see a change. As the Internet becomes the primary source for news, the way news is presented will also change. The future won't be carrying a rolled-up newspaper onto the subway; it'll be carrying your blackberry or PDA onto the subway and reading your news. This won't hold true for small community newspapers and maybe not even for regional newspapers for many years, but I believe the change is imminent on the national scene.

Whoever is the first to champion this new era of news presentation can become the Rupert Murdoch of the Internet. Of course, what I suspect will inevitably happen (actually it's already starting to happen) is that newspapers are going to recognize the undeniable truth "” that they're in the news business and not the paper business "” and you'll see the household names of the news industry like the Post and the Times revamp their online presence (because even though they already have active and popular websites, those websites are, for the most part, only supplementing their print editions, even though the Post's website is a completely separate entity from the newspaper) and get a thumbhold on Internet news reporting. If that were to happen, nothing will change in American media except for the way news is presented. But if America's current declining faith in news reporting continues, the way will be made for a whole new generation of news companies. I suspect, however, that those newspapers will realize that the ebb of journalism tide is changing in more ways than one and there truly will be a difference in the way news is presented.

I do think that if this vast revolution of the way news is presented is to take place, the Internet will be the medium through which it happens. TV networks like CNN and Fox and, to a much lesser extent, even MSNBC have put a big hurting on newspapers, but they've pretty much reached their maximum potential. There simply isn't room on television for the kind of depth and detail or analysis that newspapers provide. Of course those networks have already started building strong web presences, and CNN's Money section (money.cnn.com) does a fantastic job covering in-depth financial issues, though I couldn't care less for the network in and of itself.

The biggest hamper to all of this will be the credibility issue. The Internet is its own worst enemy. Anyone who uses the web already knows that you have to take anything you receive in an email or see posted in a discussion thread with a grain of salt until its facts have been verified. While the cost of newsprint and production require enough overhead to keep Joe Blow with gossip to spread from getting his words into print, the overhead required for the Internet is so ridiculously cheap that anyone can do it. But as that problem resolves itself, it's going to be interesting to see which direction news presentation in America takes over the next generation. A lot of people think blogs are going to ultimately become America's news reporters. I don't. Blogs have become one helluva burr under the saddle for newspaper publishers, and are making them sit up and take notice. And, to their credit, they will lead the charge that will force credibility back into news reporting. However, blogging (IMHO) is a fad. Successful blogging requires a lot of time, and few bloggers are able to turn even enough profit to make it a sideline income. Even the biggest bloggers (powerlineblog.com, etc.) that make good money doing what they do have to rely on the news media. They don't write the stories; they simply comment on what is being written and the flow of news in America is still controlled by the mainstream media.

What'd'ya think about the sit-i-ation?

[Aught Six]

I would put money on the Internet dominating the news media in the next decade. As stated, we're already seeing it happen. The interactivity of the Internet combined with the capability to archive and search is what places the medium high above anything in print or on TV.

Regarding credibility issues--I don't think this will hurt Internet news growth. As more people get online, society as a whole will become savvier at separating the good from the bad from the ugly. And I'm sure that primary sources like AP, Reuters, UPI, et al will still be around, selling tonew outlets, which also adds credibility to a story.

And those bloggers. You're right about them. Blogs are to Internet news what the editorial page is to print media. Each has its purpose, but neither is really news (in most instances).

[derekt28]

I'd would probably guess I would get a lot more information on my gps navigator thingy in my car's dash. It'll make for some interesting driving, unless the vehicle uses some of that navigation technology to have the car follow the road.

[kevin1]

I wouldn't trust any blog as far as I could throw it's author , they're nothing but personal opinions , and certainly not what I'd call responsible journalism . Then again CNN doesn't fit that description either most of the time ...

I don't know about y'all techies , but I don't have a laptop with a wireless modem , so when I go to "the reading room" it's not like I can get news off of the net . ...Deleted by CalHunter...

[BenGarrett]

ORIGINAL: kevin1
I don't know about y'all techies , but I don't have a laptop with a wireless modem , so when I go to "the reading room" it's not like I can get news off of the net . ...Deleted by CalHunter...

I've said many times that this is one of print media's saving graces. I do take my laptop to the toilet (in fact, I've found that I do some of my best work sitting on the john with the clothes hamper pulled over in front of me to set the computer on), but you're right: It's just not as comfortable. Course, as long as there are Cabela's magazines and auto traders, I suspect we'll be okay.

[BenGarrett]

ORIGINAL: Aught Six
ating the news media in the next decade.Â* As stated, we're already seeing it happen.Â* The interactivity of the Internet combined with the capability to archive and search is what places the medium high above anything in print or on TV.

Very true. Also, the ability to present news in "packages." Like if there was a murder that occurred two years ago and the trial is just beginning. The murder itself needs to be summarized into the trial coverage. But doing so, you sacrifice precious column inches. And because of soaring newsprint costs, the newshole is becoming increasingly small anyway. And so then you have to decide what pivotal witness testimony to cut from your story. With an online story, you can simply provide a link to previous stories that have been written. Or, because bandwidth is so cheap there are virtually no limitations except that a story stay short enough to avoid becoming gaudy, one can just summarize previous events until one's heart is content.

Most newspaper people dread the possibility of the Internet becoming the primary news medium, but I look forward to it. I suspect most reporters wouldn't give a flip one way or the other. Some old-school editors might have a problem with it, but those are the same guys who still wear plaid and cuordoroys, chain smoke, and can't accept the fact that newspaper has moved away from hot type and linotype to the digital realm. Publishers wouldn't care since they're just businessmen regardless of what medium is used. Heck, many publishers any more don't even have newspaper background. News corporations are taking guys with an MBNA and putting them in charge of the newspaper (part of newspaper's problem with losing their identity with readers, IMHO).

I think this is a transition that could happen fairly quickly once a few small obstacles are overcome. The main thing would be advertisers' acceptance of online advertising. Although the prospects are becoming brighter every quarter, many advertisers are still reluctant about advertising online.

[Aught Six]

Internet news isan interesting paradox. On one hand, the Internet has so much garbage that it can be daunting to find exactly what you're looking for. On the other, however, once you've established a trustworthy source, you can educate yourself with incredible speed and efficiency compared to relying on the traditional one-way-onlymedia.

And you're certainly right about the business aspect of news. Money is money, and an audience is an audience. Even if the old-schoolers resist modernization, some other enterprising news professionals will surely appear and make them all a thing of the past.

I think this is a transition that could happen fairly quickly once a few small obstacles are overcome. The main thing would be advertisers' acceptance of online advertising. Although the prospects are becoming brighter every quarter, many advertisers are still reluctant about advertising online.

It's been my general impression that advertisers are realizing the power of the Internet and have not been shy about buying space on commercial web sites. To be fair, though, this is a casual observation that I've made without any in-depth knowledge of marketing, whether print or digital.

In any case, I think that once Internet usage surpasses TV viewership (at least with news),reluctanceto advertise online will be a non-issue.

[Tazman]

I see that as the Internet News starts to take hold that the smart National Newspapers will roll over to the internet enticing advertisers away from the print medias dwindling circulation which will cause almost every major newspaper to either create a huge presence on the internet or die!

In thinking about this do you realize that the wood pulp industry is going to suffer drastically over the course of the next 10-20 years as newspapers fold, magazines will follow suit with the newspapers, in 10 years it will reach a point where any present print media that can not establish itself on the web will die.

[Dave590]

The internet seems to be the obvious "new" source...But untill someone figures out how to make some real money by doing it, then it will remain a secondary source of information.

Readers like me simply skip over the pop-ups and advertisements, and what is the use in "local" advertisers spending money for someone ten thousand miles away to read about the weekend "special" on strawberries?

When the financial angle is figured out, then we will have internet news.

[BenGarrett]

ORIGINAL: Tazman

In thinking about this do you realize that the wood pulp industry is going to suffer drastically over the course of the next 10-20 years as newspapers fold, magazines will follow suit with the newspapers, in 10 years it will reach a point where any present print media that can not establish itself on the web will die.

I'm not sure that it will happen that quickly. If major national newspapers became nonexistent, it would be a huge blow to the pulp wood industry, of course. I saw a study on how many fewer trees would be needed for pulp if Sunday edition newspapers alone were eliminated. I don't remember the exact number, but it was monumental.

Anyway, there will still be a foothold for community newspapers for a long time to come, I think. Internet access is going into homes at a rate none of us would have ever imagined, but once you get off Main Street USA, it still has a long way to go. Also, there doesn't seem to be the same sense of rebellion against regional and community newspapers as their is against the so-called "mainstream" newspapers. For instance, while circulation nationally has been declining over the past four years, ours has risen by almost 20%. Now if you're surmising that the toll by losing the nationals will cause the pulp industry to fold, thus forcing the locals to the 'Net, that's a different set of circumstances. If that were to happen, lord help some of these old newspaper guys . . . the "old school" guys with the plaid and chain smoking and at least one cat hanging out in their office. I think they'd just close the doors on their newspapers rather than look at the new technology. Heck, it's only been 13 years (1993) since the invent of the PDF gave them a viable option to go completely digital from the old cut & paste method of putting a newspaper together and they're still struggling today to grasp that concept.