>> given the fact that print media sales and readership have been steadily declining for some years now.


Everytime someone brings this up, i'm going to bring up the fact that newspapers and cable and network news Web sites account for about the top 18 of 20 most visited Web sites. it's just that money from Web sales is waaaaaaaaay lower. Next time I mention this rather glaring ommission I'll have the exact number.

and i didn't read your front page blurb until just now

>>Do print media moguls realize that the Internet/ Blogosphere could herald a new golden age for their industry?


See my answer above.

It's late and I don't have links. Sorry....

Korea's hottest newsite, Oh My Korea, is a new model for "journalism." Hundreds of correspondents, from journalists to housewives to students to businessmen to scientists, send in articles and stories every day.

Greenboro, North Carolina, has a newspaper re-inventing itself as a blog-driven website. Jay Rosen's Press Think has the link. He's been all over this development.

When phones with cams or video, and widespread broadband, are common you'll see a lot of city-oriented websites built around uploads from folks on the spot sending in video and pics. That's when newspapers will become what newsmagazines were ten years ago: sources of deeper reporting and analysis.

One thing I expect to see more of is a fusion of video news and print news through the web, with video links for live reporting and accompanying text for the details. This will allow both the immediacy of the TV news and the more detailed reporting of print media.

Dave

ya will see it when the conditions of technology reach the level mike said above

once folks have their dick tracy videophones hooked into wireless broadband..and can update their blogs form their blackberry's quickly to insert the content..

then "News" as we have known it for the last 100 years is gonna be something totally different..

should be Fun, folks...

Excelsior!

You don't think that having companies directly sponsor journalists will increase the temptation to pander to corporate interests?

You mean they could pander MORE than they already do?

Dave

I agree with Dave. That temptation already exists. The only change that I see possibly is that there may be more pressure under the "mobile media" system I propose on individual journalists whereas before I believe the pressure existed more at the organizational level.

Thanks,

David

Back from a good night's sleep. Still no links, though. ;-)

I just saw last week something of a view of the future. We had a severe storm move through the Memphis area, spawning funnel clouds and small tornadoes. At least two stations ran videophone pics and digital pics emailed to their stations by viewers. They were also doing lots of cut-ins (much more than in the past) with either professional weather spotters or folks they trusted phoning in reports of tornadic activity.

The pics were fascinating, but also placed the stations in the difficult position of asking for more pics -- and intervieweing those who had them -- while still cautioning viewers to remain indoors and away from severe storms.

Traditional, "objective" news will still have a market from older viewers, but I think the new digital generation is already used to filtering what they see and hear, selecting those news sources they most like or trust. That's not a bad thing, either, despite the bleating of the newspapers. Remember, the norm in American history was for every community to have many newspapers serving many different social, political and ideological camps. Pre-WWII New York had more than *40* daily and weekly newspapers! Up until the Eighties, most communities had at least two newspapers.

Diversity is good! It cultivates thinking skills, listening ability, reasoning ability and fosters debate. News and opinion are inextricably linked, a function of what's happening, what gets reported and what gets ignored, who reports it and how, to whom it's reported and all the needs, expecations, demands and politics of the audience. A handful of sources can't cover all that.

In five or ten years, you'll see nearly every city in the country with a couple of websites that are open to submissions of pictures and video by the public. While a lot of them will have the usual flood of "look at us" pics, there will also be pictures of accidents happening, fires, robberies, public disturbances, etc. Pictures of alleged drug dealers and drug corners. Public figures spotted in public places with questionable guests.

The real change will accelerate when those communities which have difficulty with police relations can take and post pictures as they happen. Think Rodney King, but real-time and unedited. No identity protection for accused officers. No media suppression or editing. Imagine angry people able to see it happen moments after the incident, able to text-message a response to the situation, and then able to assemble in response before the police have even finished. That will be interesting....

Mike,

Excellent comments and thoughts on the subject! I agree completely. In my mind, todays print media could become a hub for exactly that kind of activity.

They gather the incoming news, analyze it, get commentary from official sources, merge the news, opinion, and analysis of dozens or even hundreds of incoming bits and pieces of information, and then report back out with the larger picture and professional analysis.

Thanks very much for you comments.

David