I hate to repeat myself, but I feel like the case study brought up a point from a week ago. Journalism is facing challenges because of the lack of innovation. Clinging to the past can not be a permanent solution. As a profession that is becoming obsolete because anyone can do it, journalist need to try to think creatively to save their profession.
What I didn't understand in Stepp's article was the NYT's cut out TV listings, and how he saw this as a bad thing. Now, I consider myself a pretty intelligent person, but I had no idea people still looked at that page. With things like DirectTV, your cable provider and the internet, one would think people wouldn't need TV listings in their newspaper. But when I think about it, everything in a newspaper could be found on the internet--and updated more often at that!
What's not dead is the story-telling gift of journalist. I agree with Stepp about putting more things in papers that actually make them unique and is exclusive to the paper. Bringing in more opinion pieces could increase reaction leading to interaction, especially if newspapers focused more on local happenings. Throw in some investigative reporting and we could really turn this industry around.
Is journalism dead? Well, that depends on how you define journalism. Is it a profession or merely an act? I think it is obvious that the old ways of journalism have died, and if journalist want to save their profession, then they need to take some initiative. If they have no faith in their industry, then so will no one else, including advertisers. Advertising makes up most of a newspaper's revenue, but who wants to advertise in a dying medium while they could advertise for cheaper and in color on a different medium like the internet.
Journalism isn't dead, just needs a shock to the chest.
What I didn't understand in Stepp's article was the NYT's cut out TV listings, and how he saw this as a bad thing. Now, I consider myself a pretty intelligent person, but I had no idea people still looked at that page. With things like DirectTV, your cable provider and the internet, one would think people wouldn't need TV listings in their newspaper. But when I think about it, everything in a newspaper could be found on the internet--and updated more often at that!
What's not dead is the story-telling gift of journalist. I agree with Stepp about putting more things in papers that actually make them unique and is exclusive to the paper. Bringing in more opinion pieces could increase reaction leading to interaction, especially if newspapers focused more on local happenings. Throw in some investigative reporting and we could really turn this industry around.
Is journalism dead? Well, that depends on how you define journalism. Is it a profession or merely an act? I think it is obvious that the old ways of journalism have died, and if journalist want to save their profession, then they need to take some initiative. If they have no faith in their industry, then so will no one else, including advertisers. Advertising makes up most of a newspaper's revenue, but who wants to advertise in a dying medium while they could advertise for cheaper and in color on a different medium like the internet.
Journalism isn't dead, just needs a shock to the chest.
No comments:
Post a Comment