25 Big Questions for the Future of Journalism and PR

Minneapolis PR man Arik Hanson recently asked me to suggest a few questions for his night as moderator of #Journchat. That got me thinking about 25 Big Questions for the Future of Journalism and PR (keep reading to see your homework assignment):

Are all newspapers folding? Just some? Which ones? Why them?
Plenty of people say newspapers will never die because people love the feel of newsprint. So if touch is so powerful, why are newspapers closing?
Why don’t newspapers let reporters work from home? Couldn’t they cut costs significantly by firing the building instead of the people?
Many journalists cringe at the Huffington Post biz model (most contributors are not paid for their work). Where does the HuffPo model fit into the future of journalism?
If every newsroom closed its doors for good tomorrow morning, what would you do?
Given what has happened to newspapers in ’08 and ’09, what skills do you wish you had further developed?
Is the blogosphere an adequate substitute for journalism?
Journos: What blogs do you subscribe to?
If social media could help preserve journalism, would you be willing to comment, engage, etc. more openly, even if it raises questions about objectivity and fairness?
Come to think of it, are ideas like objectivity outdated? Where does objectivity fit in a world where social media makes publishing less corporate and more human?
Have you ever received a social media press release? How helpful/useful was it?
Does the decline of newspapers even matter? Could this actually be a blessing in disguise?
Should bloggers adhere to journalistic standards when they publish information, even if they’re not trained journalists?
How does the changing face of journalism change the life of a PR?
Some argue a good pitch trumps a relationship with a reporter. Does the same argument apply w/bloggers, who are more “social”?
How does the current upheaval in the newspaper business create opportunities for smart PRs?
Given declining readerships, shrinking content and dwindling staffs, which is more important for PR: Pitching to traditional journalists or pitching to bloggers? Why?
Are bloggers an effective enough government watchdog? An effective enough corporate watchdog?
Will the blogosphere adhere to the same standards of objectivity, fairness and truth as traditional journalists?
Who will emerge as the enforcer(s) of journalistic standards as traditional newsrooms and editorial controls vanish?
If newspapers are struggling to generate print ad revenue, will they have any more luck generating online ad revenue?
What industry is the next domino to fall after newspapers?
Should colleges and universities still offer degree programs in print journalism?
If you’re a PR and you’re not paying attention to the shifting journalism industry, how do you plan to be relevant in 5 years?
Will TV news programs one day suffer the same fate as newspapers?

I told you there’d be a homework assignment, right? I want this to be a community discussion. Pick any of these 25 Big Questions and answer it in the comments. Extra credit if you respond to someone else’s comment. You in?

astolarz1

Although some blogs are focused on social commentary and personal beliefs, I believe there are blogs that can be focused on truth-finding. In some cases I think blogs can equate to the same standards of journalism as a newspaper/news program. I don't think blogs are an adequate substitution, but I think they're on their way there. Blogs can also educate the public and affect the masses without using opinions. Blogs can be all fact driven Many print journalists are required to keep blogs dealing with the news, and they're able to withstand their opinions.
laceewentworth

I'm going to take a stab at number 25. Will TV news programs one day suffer the same fate as newspapers?

I believe this question has an obvious answer which is the fact that TV news programs will NOT one day suffer the same fate as newspapers. If you think about it, until TV news programs came out newspapers were quite successful. People like to know news and what is going on around them. Most people prefer to have someone tell them news than to read it. TV news broadcast programs are something that can not be replaced, and that means even by the internet. Newspapers are failing for one reason because they can now be found and read for free on the internet. And with today's technology more people would rather go to their TV for free to get the news, or even computer than to their driveway to pick up the paper they just paid around $1.50 for per day. With TV news programs however, even if they were broadcast online, I think people would still choose to watch them via television on their couch where the news is fed to them, rather than on their computer where they would have to navigate and direct their news choice. I think it is safe to say that TV news programs are around for good.
sheilaburns

It is definitely true that blogs cannot be held accountable for legitimate news. Much of the information provided through someone's blog could be true, but there is so much opinion involved in these types of personal websites, that the credibility is not that great.
Having the opportunity to blog about personal interests, hobbies, or information is a great addition to the web for people to be able to express themselves, but I do not think it will or should ever be a substitute for journalism.
adam_goering

12. Does the decline of newspapers even matter? Could this actually be a blessing in disguise?

This is an interesting question. The shift from print to online media sources does allow for easier and more complete access into the news, not just locally but throughout the world. Up until this point in the world of journalism the decision to publish a story has been left to those covering the news and the editors they report to. And while they would obviously select the most interesting and relevant stories for print as a means of selling papers and increasing revenues, stories that an editor may deem unimportant or that reporters had no access to would go unreported and unread. In this new age of online media the number of voices relaying the news to the world is infinite. No longer does a news organization have to fund a reporter traveling deep into Africa for the world to learn about what is going on there. Anyone can share their news with the world, and anyone who is interested can be a consumer of it. The most readily available example occurred during the recent turmoil following the Iranian elections. Almost all of the news coming out of Iran was being shared by ordinary people who happened to have first hand accounts of the situation. And although I don't really support Twitter as a news source, the principle that more news can reach more people faster online cannot be refuted.

However the loss of newspapers does make the role of being a professional journalist a risky endeavor. Until a model can be discovered that would allow news agencies operating solely online to at least break even, let alone make a prophet, the number of professional journalists working as strictly internet reporters will never be very high. And I am afraid that if society loses professional reporters because it isn't financially viable, then the more in depth reporting that newspapers allow will go to the wayside and news consumers will have to rely on bits and pieces of news posted by various people and try to formulate things for themselves. As long as TV news doesn't follow newspapers into oblivion there will still be a few reporters working in depth for broadcast, but it seems that the reporters and potential reporters lost along with newspapers would be a critical blow. Online media must find a way to keep professional reporters employed in order for this shift to be entirely beneficial.
carolineausterman

I agree with you. I think that people will always enjoy reading newspapers and they will not all die out. I know that I would much rather read a newspaper than read the news online- it's relaxing.
gardeniacoleman

I agree with you. If someone is not willing to put their name on their work and supplement with facts and links it may just be opinion. There are no real rules for blogging. That's why I think blogging can supplement but not substitute journalism.
Jake

What about legitimate journalists who happen to blog? The Washington Post has an extremely popular collection of blog pots written by Post journalists. What happens if people just start to look to more respected media outlets online (i.e. reading the NY Times online as opposed to the paper copies) and ignore the rest of the self-published bloggers.

Also, I'd like to make the point that it evokes a more objective view by the audience; If someone is reading a blog and aware that there is a possibility of inaccurate information, they may be more likely to do their own fact checking than if it came from a more “respected” source.

That being said, I agree completely, that sitting down and reading a newspaper is far more relaxing than reading it on my laptop or phone.
jacklynangel

I totally agree with sheilaburns. It is fact that newspapers are folding, but newspapers not existing? Never. It is hard to break traditions and picking up a newspaper and reading it has been tradition for quite a while now. Also, the prestige and credibility of such form journalism is also what people like about print journalism. The use of the web is phenomenal, green (no trees are sacrificed), and free, but the setback of getting news strictly from the web is that ANYONE can publish anything and call it “news” now a days.
laceewentworth

I agree with the fact that bloggers should not be upheld to the same standards as professional journalist should be, but sometimes it is hard for the reader to differentiate between the two. Bloggers do not have to be fair, creditable, or even correct for that matter! Journalists should adhere to the standard like you were saying and be honest, unbiased, and factual! Bloggers can state their opinion, where journalist should never show their opinion or take a side of any issue in most situations. Journalist should also not cause harm or hurt others with their reporting and be ethical at all times, where as many commentators or bloggers often do not and should not have to adhere to this standard, they should always be allowed to express their open and honest opinion without scold, because if they were not allowed, journalist they would basically be.
mallorykydd

23. Should colleges and universities still offer degree programs in print journalism?

The skill sets that print journalists have are the same ones that broadcast journalists need to have as well as PR and digital. Many of the classes offered at the Walter Cronkite School for print and other J-mediums cross over.

“Print Journalism” is not dieing. It is merging, it is changing. It is merging to a new platform and that is being called digital journalism. The courses that my classmates take in their print major are extremely beneficial to their journalism career because they are cultivating their writing skills.

The broadcast journalists now have to write their own stories, maintain blog and tweet. All expertise of a “print journalist”.

The major itself will eventually be weeded out- but the classes and skills taught in this field need to stay and be passed on to future J-students. It is too soon to give a definite, YES, because we still are printing newspapers, magazines and books.
danneligh

17. I think it's safe to say that, in general, PR folks should continue to pitch to traditional journalists rather than bloggers. While the number of blogs and blog followers continues to grow, their reader/viewership is still substantially less than that of traditional media outlets when taken in summation. Further, it is often the case that a PR representative has to pitch their story to an individual or small group of individuals that represent larger news outlets–to reach an equivalent number of viewers, a PR rep would have to talk to hundreds of bloggers, all with comparatively small readerships. There are certainly some possible exceptions–if, for example, an unsuccessful local newspaper was reaching a smaller audience than a popular blog, then it may be best for PR people to court the bloggers. Same story if the issue the PR rep is trying to pitch coincides nicely with the same demographic that reads a particular blog. But for the most part, sticking with the old-fashioned media would be best.
moniquewilson

Will the blogosphere adhere to the same standards of objectivity, fairness and truth as traditional journalists?

The blogosphere will and will not adhere to the same standards of objectivity, fairness and truth as “traditional journalists.” I say this because as a blogger, one is offering his/her heartfelt opinion on an issue, which may or may not have facts. While as a journalist, one is expected to cast his/her own personal opinions aside and offer reports on an issue that needs the support of facts and figures. The blogosphere at times can offer insight into many issues, adhering to journalistic standards, that some journalists might think twice about delving in. There are many bloggers who want to express their views and do so in an objective and fair manner, as well as those that feel the need to write whatever they please regardless of whether or not it is objective, fair or true. This also ties into question 13, which ask if bloggers should adhere to the same journalistic standards when they publish, even if they are not trained. I think not. A blog is a blog and not a journalistic piece. A blogger is not necessarily a journalist, but should specify. And if a blogger is a journalist, then I would expect him/her to be objective and truthful.
mallorykydd

These are also skills that I, as a broadcast major, wish to further develop. Right now we need to keep on pressing to keep up with the changing scene of digital media. I agree that I need to sharpen my skills on how to communicate online. I am looking forward to exploring all the avenues of social media.
adam_goering

Although the fact that blogs are unreliable and cannot really be policed for accuracy is a major issue facing news consumers in the coming years, there is also another issue that I think will have to be confronted as online news sources become more and more the primary source of society's news. The fact is that with newspapers the editors and reporters collect all of the news of the day and filter it, selecting the stories they think the readers will find the most interesting and which will sell the most stories. Even online it is news sites like new york times and washington post where people find their news. Although the filter can result in some stories not being reported or arguably less important stories being over-reported (see Michael Jackson), all of the news is still consolidated and is all available at one place. I worry that this new breed of media consumer, if required to look all over the place for their news as opposed to in one or two verifiable sources, will neglect to be properly informed about the world in which they live. Therefore, the issue of reliability aside, although specialized blogs are interesting, I don't think they will ever be able to effectively take the place of more professional news sources. Hopefully we can find a way to make them financially viable.
hyattromeo

I agree with you, and I think that the blogosphere is an excellent way for people to relate with each other and discuss issues going on in their lives. The blogosphere should be the place for people to disseminate the information given to them by journalists, not the place for people to find info they need to make informed decisions. I think that “traditional journalism” and blogging are both great, and are both going to have to evolve in order to complement each other successfully, as a way to obtain objective information and discuss issues.
jacklynangel

I definitely share views of blogs not having the credibility and accountability at this point in time. Sheilaburns also makes a great point by saying the opinions of the bloggers are at most times present in the posts. This is where the traditional form of reporting news and the newly booming blogsphere differ and traditional form defeats the blogs we know today.
brenna_sowder

Sara, I think that we agree, but have responded in different ways. You to seem to be responding to the question from the perspective of people that are producing “news” believing that objectivity is outdated, and I responded with the opinion that objectivity is NOT outdated — or rather should not be — and remains an essential component of quality news. In practice, those many news media outlets seem to be making objectivity a lesser priority. But who is responsible for saying whether objectivity is outdated or not? Do we, the consumers, no longer demand that of our news sources and prefer drama and entertainment value? It is more and more the responsibility the consumer to find news sources that approach objectivity. By the way, I think that there never was “pure and total objectivity” in a news source, but at least it seems many outlets used to try a little harder.
danneligh

I completely agree with your statement about in-depth news. It seems as though investigative reporting, for example, is destined to diminish and die off. When Jim Lehrer came to visit the Cronkite school last year, I asked him what he thought was going to happen to investigative journalism knowing that it was in such a downward spiral, and he said it was likely going to become the work of journalists hired by private research institutes and whatnot. A frightening thought, I think.
moniquewilson

Well said! There is no way that the blogosphere will ever be an adequate substitute for journalism. Most people use blogging as an outlet, as a way to say what is on their minds without being held accountable, journalist understand that whatever you publish you will have to be able to back it up with facts, and report on things that people want to know about. Not just ranting and raving, which(no offense to serious news blogs) many blogs are about.
Justin Moore

In response to #10, and as a blanket statement for the importance of newspapers/journalism, I'd refer to a quote that goes something like – “The world will always need good journalism, not good journalists.” (The New Yorker quote? Can't find the source now…).

In short, the idea being presented here is that the key components of good journalism: accuracy, timeliness, relevance AND objectivity amongst others, are essential to how we present news today and should continue to be tomorrow. Do we need brick and mortar newspaper HQ? Perhaps not. But if we're going to be so bold as to claim the media for ourselves then we better be prepared to do it the right way – otherwise, we're in trouble.

Subjectivity and self expression are highly coveted in this society, hence the surging popularity of social media. However, it's dangerous, irresponsible and – at times – just plain lazy to disregard traditional and objective news reporting. Facts are facts – I'm all for hearing your opinion on Twitter, your blog, etc., but there HAS to be an objective news source available at all times. Enter journalism. And for those who may be confused: Journalism and blogging are not always the same thing.

Happy news consuming!
http://twitter.com/cklenotic Christina Klenotic

#14 How does the changing face of journalism change the life of a PR (person)?

Journalists increasing use of social media is impacting the way I do my job as a PR professional. Consider this:

Of print, broadcast, and online journalists
48% use LinkedIn, 45% use Facebook to assist in reporting
68% use blogs to keep up on issues or topics of interest
86% use company Web sites, 71% use Wikipedia and 46% use blogs to research an individual organization
The Society for New Communications Research and Middleberg Communications (160 sample size)

There is more I need to stay on top of to do my job well. I follow journalists' blogs and Twitter accounts to stay on top of their interests and interact with them to position myself as a source on topics important to them. In addition, I'm helping my clients to understand that information they put out via corporate blogs, LinkedIn groups and wikis are emerging as important sources of information for the journalists who cover them.
Justin Moore

In response to #10, and as a blanket statement for the importance of newspapers/journalism, I'd refer to a quote that goes something like – “The world will always need good journalism, not good journalists.” (The New Yorker quote? Can't find the source now…).

In short, the idea being presented here is that the key components of good journalism: accuracy, timeliness, relevance AND objectivity amongst others, are essential to how we present news today and should continue to be tomorrow. Do we need brick and mortar newspaper HQ? Perhaps not. But if we're going to be so bold as to claim the media for ourselves then we better be prepared to do it the right way – otherwise, we're in trouble.

Subjectivity and self expression are highly coveted in this society, hence the surging popularity of social media. However, it's dangerous, irresponsible and – at times – just plain lazy to disregard traditional and objective news reporting. Facts are facts – I'm all for hearing your opinion on Twitter, your blog, etc., but there HAS to be an objective news source available at all times. Enter journalism. And for those who may be confused: Journalism and blogging are not always the same thing.

Happy news consuming!
davidhertz

Scott,

This is a great list of questions and could trigger dozens of conversations. Many of the questions imply an absolute answer, No. 7, 18, 23 among them.

Throughout my 20-year career in newspapers, I found that robust debate from a variety of sources was a good thing. That included responsible sources of information, be they bloggers, PR professionals, journalists or other sources. Now, as a PR professional, I still believe in the diversity of conversation. Is society losing when newspapers fold and watchdog journalism dwindles? Sure we are. But until newspapers, and media in general, devise a better business model, (and they will) we'll have to live with the loss.

Thanks for the post!
christinaklenotic

#14 How does the changing face of journalism change the life of a PR (person)?

Journalists increasing use of social media is impacting the way I do my job as a PR professional. Consider this:

Of print, broadcast, and online journalists
48% use LinkedIn, 45% use Facebook to assist in reporting
68% use blogs to keep up on issues or topics of interest
86% use company Web sites, 71% use Wikipedia and 46% use blogs to research an individual organization
The Society for New Communications Research and Middleberg Communications (160 sample size)

There is more I need to stay on top of to do my job well. I follow journalists' blogs and Twitter accounts to stay on top of their interests and interact with them to position myself as a source on topics important to them. In addition, I'm helping my clients to understand that information they put out via corporate blogs, LinkedIn groups and wikis are emerging as important sources of information for the journalists who cover them.
davidhertz

Scott,

This is a great list of questions and could trigger dozens of conversations. Many of the questions imply an absolute answer, No. 7, 18, 23 among them.

Throughout my 20-year career in newspapers, I found that robust debate from a variety of sources was a good thing. That included responsible sources of information, be they bloggers, PR professionals, journalists or other sources. Now, as a PR professional, I still believe in the diversity of conversation. Is society losing when newspapers fold and watchdog journalism dwindles? Sure we are. But until newspapers, and media in general, devise a better business model, (and they will) we'll have to live with the loss.

Thanks for the post!
http://twitter.com/someonethatisme Nicholas Cafalone

The newspaper industry is not dying, it is just hitting a bump in the road. Not every paper is doing badly in today's economy. Metropolitan dailies are suffering and are having to find ways to make cuts, but they will surely bounce back once the economy steadies. Most weeklies are doing as well as they have always done or even better. Some people believe that the internet will start to dominate the way people receive their news, but I believe that they do not offer the variety and access to local news that one finds in their local dailPr
http://twitter.com/someonethatisme Nicholas Cafalone

I would have to agree with your for the most part about televised news. I believe that the local nightly news programs will continue to flourish and be relevant, but I have my doubts about the fates of the 24 hour news programs. It may just be wishful thinking but with the economy going the way it has been, will a network be able to afford to hire the necessary employees and employ them at a reasonable rate. I believe that the large 24 hour news networks will have to change their format sometime in the future and offer something other than news on their stations. Pr
Stefanie Beekman

In response to question 25, I don't believe TV programs will suffer. I think if anything, it is adding to the popularity of news today. In many instances, people watch the news and then follow up on the website for further information about the story. I think these go hand-in-hand. Some people also watch the TV version for updates the next day. Many people choose one or the other, but many people also use both.
PatOConnell

When I read question seven I find myself thinking, 'No, it can't be a substitute'. While I read blogs, and find them to be a good distributor of the news, I do not compare them to news outlets and journalism.

Blogs, although they have their sources and are reporting the news, just do not come off as authentic and reliable as a newspaper, or news broadcast. While there might be a blog that I will go to before a newspaper, or a online newspaper, I see them as something that in terms of legitimacy does not compare.

To be a journalist requires education and experience, that some bloggers may indeed have, more so than those reporting the news, but that education and experience is a reliability to fall back on. However, when it gets to the reliability of blogs as a whole I just tend to think negatively upon them. Anyone can have a blog, and can have that blog get a lot of hits, but this doesn't make it a good and sufficient substitute for newspaper reporting for me.

The history and legitimacy of newspapers and journalism outweigh the speed and availability of the blogs in terms of reporting the news, in my opinion.
PatOConnell

I agree that TV will not be doomed the same way that newspapers were by technology, especially because of the advances in television. TV in the future may simply be like a website, but they will still be available. TV is something that people turn to for a time out, a time to relax and catch up on the news. The availability of TV removes the comparison to newspapers for me because they are a different media in themselves, and I don't think that the evolutions in society remove the visual and audio aspects from our daily use that TV gives. I think that in the future people may use the internet for video, but TV will still be important. In that sense I agree that the two go hand-in-hand.
Hannah Smith

These questions give a hard perspective on the field and really make people think.

There are a few ways to answer question 18. The blogger has a different perspective than the journalist. The blogger works in that industry, or office thus know the things that not even the journalist can find out. How the workers interact and how the office or company is truly run. The journalist can ask and dig but can he or she truly know if they don't work there.

As far as for government watchdog, the blogger also has that different perspective. They may be the family that uses that government funded program officials want to shut down while the journalist doesn't because they don't use it.

However there is the flip-side of it, the blogger may only have the sphere of influence of their family while the journalist has a readership/see-ship of an entire city or country.
Stefanie Beekman

I agree!! I believe that it is important to keep this “old fashioned media” alive. You must remember that people still read magazines, as well as newspapers. “Print” does not only apply to newspapers. Magazines are still in high demand and many students interested in print are interested in working at a magazine company. I have not heard anything about declining magazine readers. If, at the very least, print journalism classes should continue to be offered. After all, the base of journalism started from print. For example: I am a JOURNALISM major, with a CONCENTRATION in broadcast. The root of my major is essentially journalism.
http://decoymusic.com/ Jose Terrero

I feel blogs are a good start for people who are interested in journalism, but it definitely should not be limited to those who are professional journalist or people who are aspiring to be one. Social networking sites like Facebook and Linkedin have showed us that there are people out there who love to write about random things and they have readers. We aren't talking about world news, but more like people who have an interest in visiting places and writing about their experiences or even people with a love for action figures.

Pretty much, I see blogs as a way to unwind whatever is in the authors head. Where we are in America, socially, maybe it is a good thing we can rant about anything we want on the internet instead of bottling things up and exploding in a school or a post office. Those lines at the post office can get pretty long.
http://decoymusic.com/ Jose Terrero

I like to think of this whole newspaper issue as a survival of the fittest. After a few years all the crappy papers will go away and we'll be left with some solid ones. And then once we find a way to make money again, the process will start all over again.
Maggy

These questions are extremely relevant to every living individual – unless they are living without media connections such as a computer, television, cell phone, radio or paper delivery boy. In response to number 23, journalism programs at colleges and universities should be prepared to educate students with upcoming and updated versions of the art of writing and reporting; this is relative to any program of study. Science programs, specifically those involved with ecology, have weaved “new” ideas (such as global warming)
that have evolved into large issues within the past few years, into the classroom. Journalism must evolve in the same way – educational institutes should continue to offer print journalism, alongside the “newer” versions of media and communication (blogs, youtube, online newspapers..). Sure, other media areas may suffer as online technology continues to grow at a rapid pace, but I strongly believe TV news programs will continue to air. The current popular method of retrieving news is mainly via Internet; however, online news scoops and blurbs haven't stopped everyone from relaxing with a copy of the New York Times on a lazy Sunday morning, or flipping on the television after dinner to check in on the latest news coverage. The media and reporting industry needs to roll with the punches and train the next generation of reporters and journalists to expand the old terms of “what is journalism?”
Kwesi Asante

2) I think it's actually the opposite. These days people want to carry around as little as possible. Hence the evolution of smart phones that can do everything such as make calls, browse the web, get stock quotes, listen to music, etc. Newspapers are bulky to carry around and I believe that is contributing to its demise. To add to this, laptops/netbooks are getting thinner every year and more people are using them as an alternative rather than carrying around a newspaper. People also don't want to pay subscription fees for news, which they can obtain for free via the Internet. In all honesty, the newspaper business deserves to die out to an extent. It was based on a bad business model. The amount of trees it takes to make the newspapers and the amount of fuel that is used in order to transport the newspapers to stores and people's doorsteps is not necessary. Out earth has suffered because of this.

The delivery of media is evolving and newspapers that were once giants need to embrace these changes in order to survive. These days, people prefer visuals. My suggestion would be for these companies to look into delivering content via the Internet at a nominal fee. They should also focus on delivering content via television. These two areas are were people spend most of their time these days.
Hannah Smith

The bad thing about this is that not every company wants to put their content online. We all know that once it is on one website it is everywhere regardless if the website is sponsored by the company or bootlegged. It is not a question of if the audience will benefit from it, it is a question of regulation.
Maggy

I agree with your take on blogs – anyone is eligible to create their own blogs, and for the most part I always associate figures such as Perez Hilton and other Hollywood drama figures with blogs. Granted, that assumption is probably true, but not for the most part. In my opinion, blogs are not valid forms of the news; unless of course Anderson Cooper or a New York Times staff writer created the blog. Even so, one blogger is by no means equivalent to an entire news cast.
http://twitter.com/someonethatisme Nicholas Cafalone

The newspaper industry is not dying, it is just hitting a bump in the road. Not every paper is doing badly in today's economy. Metropolitan dailies are suffering and are having to find ways to make cuts, but they will surely bounce back once the economy steadies. Most weeklies are doing as well as they have always done or even better. Some people believe that the internet will start to dominate the way people receive their news, but I believe that they do not offer the variety and access to local news that one finds in their local dailPr
http://twitter.com/someonethatisme Nicholas Cafalone

I would have to agree with your for the most part about televised news. I believe that the local nightly news programs will continue to flourish and be relevant, but I have my doubts about the fates of the 24 hour news programs. It may just be wishful thinking but with the economy going the way it has been, will a network be able to afford to hire the necessary employees and employ them at a reasonable rate. I believe that the large 24 hour news networks will have to change their format sometime in the future and offer something other than news on their stations. Pr
Stefanie Beekman

In response to question 25, I don't believe TV programs will suffer. I think if anything, it is adding to the popularity of news today. In many instances, people watch the news and then follow up on the website for further information about the story. I think these go hand-in-hand. Some people also watch the TV version for updates the next day. Many people choose one or the other, but many people also use both.
PatOConnell

When I read question seven I find myself thinking, 'No, it can't be a substitute'. While I read blogs, and find them to be a good distributor of the news, I do not compare them to news outlets and journalism.

Blogs, although they have their sources and are reporting the news, just do not come off as authentic and reliable as a newspaper, or news broadcast. While there might be a blog that I will go to before a newspaper, or a online newspaper, I see them as something that in terms of legitimacy does not compare.

To be a journalist requires education and experience, that some bloggers may indeed have, more so than those reporting the news, but that education and experience is a reliability to fall back on. However, when it gets to the reliability of blogs as a whole I just tend to think negatively upon them. Anyone can have a blog, and can have that blog get a lot of hits, but this doesn't make it a good and sufficient substitute for newspaper reporting for me.

The history and legitimacy of newspapers and journalism outweigh the speed and availability of the blogs in terms of reporting the news, in my opinion.
PatOConnell

I agree that TV will not be doomed the same way that newspapers were by technology, especially because of the advances in television. TV in the future may simply be like a website, but they will still be available. TV is something that people turn to for a time out, a time to relax and catch up on the news. The availability of TV removes the comparison to newspapers for me because they are a different media in themselves, and I don't think that the evolutions in society remove the visual and audio aspects from our daily use that TV gives. I think that in the future people may use the internet for video, but TV will still be important. In that sense I agree that the two go hand-in-hand.
Hannah Smith

These questions give a hard perspective on the field and really make people think.

There are a few ways to answer question 18. The blogger has a different perspective than the journalist. The blogger works in that industry, or office thus know the things that not even the journalist can find out. How the workers interact and how the office or company is truly run. The journalist can ask and dig but can he or she truly know if they don't work there.

As far as for government watchdog, the blogger also has that different perspective. They may be the family that uses that government funded program officials want to shut down while the journalist doesn't because they don't use it.

However there is the flip-side of it, the blogger may only have the sphere of influence of their family while the journalist has a readership/see-ship of an entire city or country.
Stefanie Beekman

I agree!! I believe that it is important to keep this “old fashioned media” alive. You must remember that people still read magazines, as well as newspapers. “Print” does not only apply to newspapers. Magazines are still in high demand and many students interested in print are interested in working at a magazine company. I have not heard anything about declining magazine readers. If, at the very least, print journalism classes should continue to be offered. After all, the base of journalism started from print. For example: I am a JOURNALISM major, with a CONCENTRATION in broadcast. The root of my major is essentially journalism.
http://decoymusic.com/ Jose Terrero

I feel blogs are a good start for people who are interested in journalism, but it definitely should not be limited to those who are professional journalist or people who are aspiring to be one. Social networking sites like Facebook and Linkedin have showed us that there are people out there who love to write about random things and they have readers. We aren't talking about world news, but more like people who have an interest in visiting places and writing about their experiences or even people with a love for action figures.

Pretty much, I see blogs as a way to unwind whatever is in the authors head. Where we are in America, socially, maybe it is a good thing we can rant about anything we want on the internet instead of bottling things up and exploding in a school or a post office. Those lines at the post office can get pretty long.
http://decoymusic.com/ Jose Terrero

I like to think of this whole newspaper issue as a survival of the fittest. After a few years all the crappy papers will go away and we'll be left with some solid ones. And then once we find a way to make money again, the process will start all over again.
Maggy

These questions are extremely relevant to every living individual – unless they are living without media connections such as a computer, television, cell phone, radio or paper delivery boy. In response to number 23, journalism programs at colleges and universities should be prepared to educate students with upcoming and updated versions of the art of writing and reporting; this is relative to any program of study. Science programs, specifically those involved with ecology, have weaved “new” ideas (such as global warming)
that have evolved into large issues within the past few years, into the classroom. Journalism must evolve in the same way – educational institutes should continue to offer print journalism, alongside the “newer” versions of media and communication (blogs, youtube, online newspapers..). Sure, other media areas may suffer as online technology continues to grow at a rapid pace, but I strongly believe TV news programs will continue to air. The current popular method of retrieving news is mainly via Internet; however, online news scoops and blurbs haven't stopped everyone from relaxing with a copy of the New York Times on a lazy Sunday morning, or flipping on the television after dinner to check in on the latest news coverage. The media and reporting industry needs to roll with the punches and train the next generation of reporters and journalists to expand the old terms of “what is journalism?”
Kwesi Asante

2) I think it's actually the opposite. These days people want to carry around as little as possible. Hence the evolution of smart phones that can do everything such as make calls, browse the web, get stock quotes, listen to music, etc. Newspapers are bulky to carry around and I believe that is contributing to its demise. To add to this, laptops/netbooks are getting thinner every year and more people are using them as an alternative rather than carrying around a newspaper. People also don't want to pay subscription fees for news, which they can obtain for free via the Internet. In all honesty, the newspaper business deserves to die out to an extent. It was based on a bad business model. The amount of trees it takes to make the newspapers and the amount of fuel that is used in order to transport the newspapers to stores and people's doorsteps is not necessary. Out earth has suffered because of this.

The delivery of media is evolving and newspapers that were once giants need to embrace these changes in order to survive. These days, people prefer visuals. My suggestion would be for these companies to look into delivering content via the Internet at a nominal fee. They should also focus on delivering content via television. These two areas are were people spend most of their time these days.
Hannah Smith

The bad thing about this is that not every company wants to put their content online. We all know that once it is on one website it is everywhere regardless if the website is sponsored by the company or bootlegged. It is not a question of if the audience will benefit from it, it is a question of regulation.