Internet primary news source in five years

Posted Wednesday, June 4, 2008 at 8:10pm in Blogging, Business, Media  | 

So says a report by the Word Digital Media Trends, a not-for-profit organisation which includes members from 76 national newspaper associations in 102 countries. According to an Associated Press article in Yahoo News covering the report, newspapers will lose their dominant grip by 2013 as more and more people consume their news from their respective online versions. The articles also states that rising online advertising revenues and the increase in mobile web usage will also play a part in this shift.

How they calculated the five year time-span is unclear. What does seem to be clear, however, is that newspapers will form much more of a love/hate relationship with bloggers. Love because they appreciate how bloggers will take their news articles, link to them and add an opinion on them (as I’m doing now). Hate because it’s an equal level playing field where bloggers could potentially steal readers away from them.

For example, why do I have to read a newspaper’s motoring supplement when there are blogs like Autoblog? Why do I have to read a newspaper’s football (soccer) section when there are sites like Soccerlens? And why would I have to read a newspaper’s celeb section when there are blogs like Perez Hilton, who is much more catty and snarky than a mainstream celeb gossipist would ever dare to be?

Things will become more interesting if/when digital paper is introduced. It’s going to do to reading what the iPod did to music, apparently.

That said, proper journalism covering hard, thorough and indepth news will always shine through; there is no better substitute for it. But given that a number of newspaper websites now include the ability for people to comment on them, like the Times, should journalists be accountable for their news articles and respond in the comments?

Obviously there is a time issue involved but the every-day person is beginning to demand some form of two-way conversation online - and a journalist that does not respond could (stress: could) potentially be perceived as somewhat ignorant and out of tune with this two-way nature of the internet.

Article found via a tweet by Tiffany Berryman.

Related Posts

2 Comments

a gravatar

Leo Valiquette

Thursday, June 5, 2008 at 1:27pm

As a business journalist turned PR practicioner, I wholeheartedly agree that there will always be a place for “proper journalism covering hard, thorough and indepth news.” But the challenge will certainly be getting said journalists to become engaged in the community conversation that defines social media and the Internet. As a journalist, the challenge is often cultivating the professional contacts necessary to having an ear to the ground and gaining a thorough understanding of a particular beat. Often, this process produces very casual relationships with key sources, but both sides of that equation must always remember this is a professional relationship. The journalist’s autonomy to produce objective coverage must not be compromised.

When it comes to engaging in a dialogue with readers through social media, journalists have to remain focused on this and stay level-headed. It’s a sterotype only becuase it is often true — journalists are thin-skinned when the subject of criticism or public comment and would rather avoid interaction with their audience. This will obviously have to change with the times.

a gravatar

The Red Rocket

Thursday, June 5, 2008 at 2:44pm

Good spot, although I think it’ll be a while before traditional media has its influence marginalised. It’s analagous to retail: e-commerce vs the high street. It gets loads of media attention from people like us, but online shopping is still a drop in the ocean (though growing).

That said, traditional media outlets have already started to change their ways, with most papers having blogs and multimedia content these days. What’s interesting is how the PR industry will react to these changes and engage with the blogging community.

Leave a Comment