Forum Moderators: open
Is this common?
Note: this is a bored Friday post from BDW who is in a business lull.
I don't think Newspapers will die for the same reasons Radio didn't die with the arrival of TVs. They will just adapt to the changes in the world. For similar reasons, I don't believe ebooks are going to replace printed books as well. I think they will just all co-exist.
Interesting; I suspect you are wrong, however. Newspapers have already 'given up' on news, and depend more and more on columns and celebrity tosh. Meanwhile their circulations fall inexorably, and home deliveries are falling apart. But what do the columns do that blogs don't? and what does their celeb coverage do that is not bettered by a combination of web sites. tv and glossy mags?
With books, the co-existence is likely to last much longer. But whilke we think of the paperback as 'always around', mass market paperbacks did not exist before 1945; once a slimline, rechargeable, downloadable pocket electronic book is perfected, the paperback will disappear within five years ... but the one essential criterion has not been met - it must be safe and convenient to read in the bath. And if it can do sudoku too, then it's home and dry :)
And if I'm wrong, it will be entirely due to the greed of pubishers. That may add a few years. But we went from 78s to 45s to tapes, to cds, to MP3 in less than 50 years. Once the book revolution starts, it'll move faster.
Newspapers have already 'given up' on news
Not the ones I know.
Other than such specialist sub-groups, readership is declining significantly faster than the death rate, even among the red-tops.
Young people who want to know what's going on in the world just do not turn to newspapers in any numbers any more; they are overwhelmingly computer literate, and they expect - rightly or wrongly - to get what they need from that.
Video killed the radio stars, but not radio - but radio is free to the user, and easier to manage in a moving vehicle or via headphones than TV. Newspapers may similarly retain a niche in public transport users and Sunday editions; but in this country at least (uk), the commuter niche is being stolen by the 'free' newspapers, which last a few minutes, but bear little resemblance to the traditional newspaper in quality or the ratio of fact to drivel. ;)
The writing is on the wall!
Edison's first tinfoil (later beeswax) recordings in the 1880s cost nearly a week's wages and lasted only a few playings. Still it was a stunning invention (more impressive to the public than his light bulb, btw).
Early cylinder recordings were made "acoustically" because vacuum tube methods of copying performances were yet to be invented. A band, for example, could only create many recordings by playing the piece over and over in a studio!
Even into the 1950s, record "needles" had to be replaced frequently for playing 78s which had 3 minutes of play on each side.
Cheap durable 45s in the mid-50s created a teen market, and we know the rest of that story.
LisaB
How many papers have folded or merged in the last 25 years. I dont know the numbers but I am sure its is substantial.
Newspapers only exist through the revenue generated from it advertisers, not from it readership. When the readers go away the advertisers will go away and when the advertiser go away the papers will go away.
Only specialized papers like the wall Street Journal and others that serve a particular market will survive...KF
PS. Even Sir Rubert is hedging his bets!
Newspapers only exist through the revenue generated from it advertisers,
That's right - and it's classified ads that bring the profit (much more cash per square inch of page).
And it's the classified ads that are migrating fastest to the web. It varies alot from niche to niche, but in some specialty jobs, virtually all the ads are now online; in an increasing number of specialties, online advertising plus one 'paper' outlet are used - when once a job would have appeared in several magazines or newspapers.
I don't see classifieds disappearing completely from The Print ... but changing enough to buck their business model.
We don't want tons of people calling from 50 miles away about a part time job that doesn't pay all that much. Our ideal employee is one who lives within walking distance.
it has well written concise articles and news stories - for 12 year olds.This is a popular misconception, the Sun covers news stories in depth and with far less journalistic opinion and consequent bias. It is like having a précis of the news which is easy to read and understand quickly. I have tried the other so called "quality papers" and find them to be anything but.Errrm are you sure its the Sun?
When I read a newspaper I am not interested in the opinions of the journalist who wrote the piece, I don't have time to sit down for an hour a day and wade through all this "journalism" which is just designed to further the career and boost the ego of the hack who wrote it.
As Mr Friday used to say "just give me the facts mam".
"Never let the facts get in the way of a good story"
:)
This is a popular misconception, the Sun covers news stories in depth and with far less journalistic opinion and consequent bias.
Old_Honky I think this may be an unpopular conception, ;)
I am afraid that after some of their headlines like "Freddie Starr ate my Hamster" and "Gotcha" I would never buy the Sun. Also the way they have wrongly and happily assassinated the character of several people in the past makes it IMHO it nothing more than a cheap rag.
Have a look at their home page today. Is this an example of in depth news coverage?
[thesun.co.uk...]
When I read a newspaper I am not interested in the opinions of the journalist who wrote the piece
Neither is the newspaper, most of the time.
