In Response to Blogger, Brittany Kirn's "The Great American Newspaper: Becoming Extinct?"

I applaud blogger Brittany Kirn on her defense of print journalism. For potential media professionals, her stance on death of newspapers is an uplifting one. Brittany certainly represents a still large portion of the population that finds value in print news over online (and here’s some evidence).

But is Brittany’s defense sufficient? Does the value of accuracy and true investigative journalism found in newspapers outweigh the monetary value? For newspapers to stick around—maybe for just a while- people like Brittany have to keep buying, and make believers out of the growing number of online readers.

As many people have indicated, the demise of newspapers seems to be accelerating towards us. And there might be no way to stop it. Sadly, subscriptions alone won’t keep the print in circulation. Advertising and classifieds would have to make a comeback in print form as well. Perhaps they would with increased readership?

There seems to be a willing sacrifice of quality when a person chooses online journalism over print. As much as I’d like to disagree with Brittany Kirn on the issue, I do believe the result will have lasting effects on the quality of our democracy.

Are We Really Going Green?

The transition from newspapers to digitally based media could potentially lower the need to destroy forests for paper. In response to “Internet Killed the Newspaper Star” the Internet may bring about new ways to “go green” but there is another side to the story.

How the Internet affects the environment-
Some benefits of using the Internet to reduce harm on the environment would be reducing the need for printing and paper and the delivery of these newspapers. Less transportation means lower fuel emissions. Treehugger.com says that 1 to 10 grams of CO2 emissions result from one Google search. The average computer’s use of electricity produces 40 to 80 grams of CO2 emissions.

Many new forms of technology that disperse information have become useful. But the problem is what to do with them when they become unusable. 3 million tons of commodity and electronic waste is thrown away each year in the US. Natural resources are put to waste. But some corporations are attempting to make an impact.

Take the Apple Corporation for example. Although the company is constantly introducing new and improved electronics that promise advancements from previous models, they do provide a environmental plan. 6.1% of products sold in 2005 were recycled, 41.9% in 2008.



The biggest problem is that the majority of the human race, especially the US, has become excessive consumers. In relation to the news everyone wants to be informed. Oral tradition, the most effective way to avoid harm on the environment, has become impossible due to the amount of information today and the population of the world. Is there really any solution?

In Response to " Why Pay for Your News"

It is true, today's technological world relies on the Internet for news and information. It is a good reason for the demise of the newspapers. The Internet is fast, cheap and accessible to us 24/7, way more convenient than the printed news.

Technologies offer us many options of both credible and not credible information. We are given the opportunity to choose.

The convenience of the unlimited information released for us on the internet makes us comfortable. "A paper has a sports section but there are 24-hour sports channels available that are updated by the minute"(ROGER DRAEGER). Why would i want to follow the "news" if I have what interests me the most - 24-hour channels available?

Internet is great! But we should be aware of how uninformed we become, by entering "our" zone, and not the reality of news.

Response to: I Don't Expect too Many Tears at the Funeral of Printed News

Anatoliy,

I agree with your viewpoint on the disappearance of printed newspapers. I knew that all newspaper companies were scrambling to come up with with alternatives to keep themselves afloat, but I wasn't aware of The Wall Street Journals clever scheme to to keep people reading their newspaper. I believe The Wall Street Journal may be on to something by tapping into people's disdain for ads and using it to their benefit.

Perhaps this is the way to get newspaper companies to survive? People who watch the news on T.V. or read it online have to deal with the nuisance of ads that keep popping up and interrupt their reading. Hopefully more newspapers will adapt this concept and, for a small fee, we can all read our newspapers without ads. However, there are people who would rather have free news than an ad-less internet page.

I also found your research on elderly people to be very interesting. I wasn't aware so many senior citizens were already utilizing the internet to receive their news. I assumed, as I'm sure most people did, that they were the ones still buying newspaper and would be at a loss of what to do once they became obsolete. I found a website that adds to your information about senior citizens. In it, it states how senior citizens (65+) haven't utilized the internet very much, but people just younger than them (50-64) have grasped onto the internet quite well and use it often.

I like the way you end your blog, with the fact that our society has always been changing and the newspaper industry will find a way to adapt if they want to survive. It goes to show that people have had to adapt to changes before them and many more transitions are in store for the future. It reveals that although the demise of printed news is a big transition for our society, we've already gone through bigger ones and can get through this one too.

-Caitlin Eggman

Response to :You say Demise,I say Old News

"The newspaper is on its way out but like all legendary icons, its spirit will never die." Nicely put Pelzer, and you're absolutely right. Why don't we accept this change for the better and movie on, whats wrong with making a little history? The newspaper was just the beginning of this rapidly growing news industry, the internet is full blown going to win this battle, but what's the harm in that? I think we're ready for it.

For instance, Pelzer speaks of this "big Mac theory," once we take a bite of something we like we thrive for more, and newspapers are no good at fully satisfying that craving. Online news on the other hand, makes a living off that idea, its quick and conveniant. Especially for those who have wifi on their ipods or phones, its so easy to keep yourself updated no matter where you are in the world. Soon enough we will have come up with something new to override the current love for online news, but right now its newpapers that we as a society need to let go of, we can survive i promise.

In fact, Pelzer continues, "Folks, the internet surrounds and embraces us. And we love it." Indeed we do and as a result, the online news industry is growing rapidly like i mentioned before. As a result, more jobs nad companies are opening up. Therefore, this loss of job scare is nothing to fret about, there is plenty of room for more workers in the online industry, move on in!

It all comes down to moving forward, im not saying we should rush into anything, but a little change might do us all some good. The economys been on the fritz for a whole so i can understand why newspaper employees would be nervous about the Demise, but like i said, online news awaits. Get out there and get a feel for the new age! Hey, that can be the title of your first online article.. just sayin.

Response to: "Internet Killed the Newspaper Star"

It is kind of mind boggling to think that only 13% of people now purchase the local newspaper! It was so customary at one point to read the daily newspaper to be informed of the daily occurrences. Times are changing, giving way to new innovations and technological media outlets. When online companies are grossing $220 billion in a year, a 25% increase from the year before, it looks like the new trend will stick with the public.

I agree, timeliness is extremely key when deciding how you want to gather your newsworthy information. With the convenience of the internet, everything you can possibly imagine is a click away. Its nice for consumers to surf the web for news because the majority of information is free, and we only have to sacrifice some minor advertising on the right-hand side of the screen!

Google for example had a $23,650,563 revenue gain in 2009. This example shows you how profitable the internet is. This also explains how successful online corporations have been and how popular this product is. I imagine that EVERYTHING will eventually be online and a good amount of jobs will be lost because of it, but at the same time, hopefully an opportunity to create new and different jobs will arise.

Technology is obviously overpowering the print media world. This change will affect citizens positively and everyone will be benefited. Consumers will have easy access to anything and everything while the companies prosper off advertising and purchasing. I hope the newspapers can find a way to make some money by transforming their product to an online option.

I also agree with embracing the green aspect of this scenario. It is healthier for the environment and will save us money in paper production to switch from paper to online news. According to "Professor's House," they claim that the average newspaper reader consumes 3 trees a year and 200 million trees total! Now that is scary!

Sarah we are definitely on the same page, and the entire world will be soon enough. There won't be too much missed with the death of print media.

In Response and Disagreement to "In Favor of Newsprint"

No one is resorting to the Internet and I'm really not sure if anyone ever has. Over the past two decades, our generation has embraced technological advancement, including the World Wide Web, like that of a three year old boy and his teddy bear. The newspaper no longer has any kind of timeliness affect because of this advancement. By the time one can find the story, write about it and print it, writers on the net are a day ahead.

Newspapers give you a story and then wave goodbye for 24 hours. Even if we are still at the point in which online stories are not as accurate, that time is rapidly approaching. When it gets here, I have confidence that online news businesses will be able to gather the appropriate facts and conduct the necessary research that you're referring to in less than 24 hours.

I would agree that the Internet provides maybe an overload of differing perspectives on social issues. This disturbing aspect of the media has been around for much longer than the Internet has, though. For years people have had the option of a different newspaper or maybe a television news network that they prefer over others. This increase in democracy did not start with the web.

If they want to survive to see tomorrow newspapers need to change. Nytimes.com is a great example of how these businesses have adapted to the online environment. A transfer to the web by all news print businesses has been initiated and now it has to be finished.