An important thing we must ask ourselves as journalists in today's era is, "How can we keep readers reading yesterday's news in print when they could have already seen it on the web the day before?" I'd like to think this isn't something for me, as a web person, to figure out; leave it to the old school print journalists. But hey, people buy the print newspaper, and as web people, we need money to stay in business too.
The first time I noticed this problem was on September 12, 2001. The newspapers (the Staten Island Advance and the New York Daily News) arrived at our house with huge headlines and photos from the events of the day before (no need to go into detail). I remember thinking at 12 years old, "What's the point of this being in the newspaper? Hasn't everyone already heard about it?" 6 1/2 years later, I'm still not sure of the answer to this question. Did anyone read those stories? I'm sure somebody did, but after everyone had already seen the images on television (a thousand times), was it really worth all the effort to write a long, detailed story? Probably not. Then again, if the newspapers hadn't covered the biggest news of not only the day, but possibly the decade, they would have been ripped apart for not doing so. Looks to me that this is a lose-lose situation for newspapers; either don't bother with a big story, or waste money and time putting together a story that every person in the industrialized world has already heard about. Either way, the newspapers come out behind.
Perhaps that day was a foreshadowing of what's to come. It was really the first time, at least that I can think of, in which the newspaper was out of date before it hit the press. How will newspapers continue to report the most up to date news and keep readers reading once the Baby Boomers fade out? I wish I had the answer for this. All I can say is that it's not looking good for our old friend the newspaper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment