We also need news papers for a place to advertise. News papers are still a
good place to advertise (for some things... to some people).But as
your best place for news... If you like day old news, I guess so.
I think the reason some people think we still need news papers is... so the
generations of media elitists can continue to control public opinion and
elections.IF news papers were like they were back in the Cronkite
era (where he left his liberal views aside and reported what happened instead of
pushing their political agenda... the venerable news papers and networks would
not have become as irrelevant as they have become today.Technology
just allows us more options. It doesn't guarantee more accuracy, or less
agenda. It puts the responsibility (and the ability) back on us to research
what we are seeing in the news to determine if it's the truth or just
somebody's spin on the truth.
Clearly, alternatives to TV news are needed, if, for no other reason, there is
too much going on for TV, with its severe time limitations to cover. My favorite
print media are books. Internet news such as it is is great for current events.
Papers and magazines always seemed to stack up. Even just dealing with the mail
is a problem, especially with all the solicitations. Tons of credit card offers-
you can't just throw them away, I shred them to avoid identity theft
problems. And so it goes.....
What killed the newspaper was that the Internet took away most communities'
ONLY venue to place ads -- the classifieds. From Craig's List to KSL.com
-- people can now place free ads and not pay the hundreds of dollars an ad would
cost in a classified.As newspapers gave their content away for free,
Google because the main profiteer of news because it organized it, personalized
it, and presented it to online readers by linking its own paid ads to it,
regardless of source. Ironically, Google doesn't have one reporter on its
staff, but essentially take much of the profits from news. Newspapers are
trying to erect pay walls so that their best content is no longer free, but
people are still able to get around such pay walls if the content is reposted
elsewhere.Newspaper are still needed. Some papers, such as the Des
News, are relying on 'citizen journalism,' but such strategies has
created misinformed or bogus stories, such as the scandal of Mayor Winder using
an alias to write positive stories about his West Valley City. Replacing lost income from classifieds is what's needed to revive news.
@dalefarrI agree. I've mentioned this to a number of people-
the DN these days feels more like a big Church newsletter. They are trying to
appeal to a wider audience than the Wasatch Front or Utah and so it feels less
like a city or state newspaper. I come here out of curiosity. Occasionally I
find an interesting story. I read through the comment boards to laugh at some
of the things that are said and occasionally comment when some of the comments
seem outrageous or uninformed.But then, I often turn to a number of
other sources to get more information about certain stories, or news about
stories they don't report on here that affect this community. I too wish
the DN would return to some more in-depth (if not investigative) journalism.
Nowadays every reporter wants to editoralize in his articles giving his opinion
and not giving an unbiased report. So most conservatives who consist of close
to half the people don't read them.
I understand this commentary but I think it's just nostalgia. We need to
maintain the quality of a news paper while embracing new technology. The
physical news papers is dead and that is OK. The challenge is to keep reading
quality literature and not give into fluff.
The role of the press in Watergate fed a misperception of investigative
reporters whose job it is to get the bad guys. That inspired a new generation to
pursue careers in journalism for the wrong reason. The job of a responsible
investigative reporter is simply to get the facts out and leave it to the public
to decide who the bad guys are.The press is historically a scandal
industry. Watergate did much to redeem it from seedier past excesses. But their
finest hour in American history was quickly followed by a post-Watergate hubris
that cost the press some of the ground it gained. True to Proverbs’
timeless caution, pride precedes the fall.Quality journalism is not
about making money.
Independent Newspapers are needed but a couple companies own nearly all weeklies
and most daily's.They are being treated the same as any other
business when a corp takes over, and are no longer concerned with local
news only how much return can the shareholders make. I watched this happen in
early 2000 as pulitzer than lee took over nearly all weeklies in Utah and
then systematically destroyed them by replacing reporters and photographers with
generic AP articles and shutterstock. By removing most local news and photos,
which is the main reason people subscribed, the local papers are little more
than the legal maximum of advertising space and coupon inserts vs the minimum of
All media, printed, TV, radio, telephone, roadside signs are owned and operated
by business operations for business reasons. The terms
conservative, liberal, religious, and other false characterizations are just
smoke to cover the real purpose and object of the media. Will
Rogers is quoted with the “All I know is what I read in the
newspapers”. The quote is more the case today if we change the word
newspapers to the word media.
In this era of private blogs, anyone can call himself a news reporter entitled
to freedom of the press. The First Amendment sets no standards of journalistic
professionalism and that’s as it should be. Like Bob Bennett, I wonder
what will be the fate for old school journalism. Maybe I'm just getting
more cynical as I get older but it does seem like professional pride is dying in
journalism in the scramble to get the story first.It’s always
been that way to some extent. But the challenge of finding the news reporting I
feel I can trust is getting more complicated.
Bennett is correct, but the Deseret News is not really a newspaper any more.
It's geared toward public relations and feel good fluff instead of news.
In depth reporting is practically non-existent. As an old man, I remember the
days when the Deseret News excelled in local news coverage and investigative
reporting. If it ever goes back to its old model, I will subscribe again.
The biggest reason people don't read newspapers any more is not, IMO, a
product of laziness, technology or even an inability to read. It is that
newspapers are no longer seen as offering balanced coverage (they never really
did--but kept that illusion up for a long time and still fool Democrats with it
today).Consider Bennett himself saying he reads 3 newspapers a day.
If any newspaper would give anything like balanced political coverage so that
people could get both sides of any debate cogently in 1 paper, a lot of people
would actually read it-in print or online.But since they
don't...this is what you get. And if Bezos ever wants to make the Post
anything other than a vanity project, he should fire half the liberals there and
put conservatives in their places. Presto--something both informational and
worth reading. Naah....never happen.