The Fall of Newspaper

As times change, one technology transcends another and a society as a whole must adapt with it. Right now, the Internet is the source of the most recent trend of declining readership and eventual failing of newspapers all over the country. The newspapers simply can’t compete with the on-time delivery and “I need it now” fast food mentality of the modern age. Some of the most well-known newspapers like the New York Times are falling victim to this trend because their advertisers are jumping ship from the print to the online world. Revenue generated from advertiser fees online isn’t enough to make up for the windfall losses felt by the print newspapers. High production costs of running a national newspaper the size of the New York Times, Los Angeles Times or Chicago Tribune are significantly greater than can be achieved by selling advertising space online. In a New York Times article, evidence shows that readership has declined in the last year, in some cases significantly, while online viewership has shown a strong increase.

Some believe the next stage of adaptation is to begin a pay-per-view system where the online edition of a particular newspaper charges a flat rate for the viewing of each story or a monthly subscription for access to the site as a whole. While some believe that this will help to overcome the loss in advertising revenue, public opinion says the argument will fall just like the very newspapers they’re trying to save. Put simply: no one’s going to pay money for essentially the same information they can get elsewhere for free. The only real chance may be a special access section that provides insider or expert opinion that can’t be had anywhere else. For example, anyone can pull up espn.com and read all the articles on daily sporting activities, scores, standings, etc.; but for a fee a reader can access an insider only section with added insight on specific teams, sports and athletes.

The main issue with all of this, really, is the concept of reliability and authenticity. At the end of the day, the quality of the information itself, not the funding or ability to achieve the highest readership or viewer numbers, are at the heart of the debate. The Internet is a platform for common people to practice their prose, inform others of daily and cultural happenings and express disgust toward their latest hated movie or show love for their newest favorite CD. While giving an opinion on everything from the wars in the Middle East to the annoying neighbor across the street with the spying eye can be fun, if not therapeutic, it raises serious questions over the quality of the information. Journalists are educated on how to prepare stories, how to research sources and find, to the best of their knowledge, the most accurate information possible. They are looked upon as experts because of it. So when Joe Headline tries to break the latest news on the big trade made by the local sports team or the developing issue of tax levies on the community’s residential property values, one has to take a step back and determine if the information is reliable.

Ultimately, the end of the print version of news isn’t so much a loss of ideals as it is a loss of vehicle. As long as the industry can hold serve until the evolution is complete, news will still be fit to print, no matter the manner in which it’s delivered to its audience. Much in the way that compact discs are giving way to MP3s, news and books will all be digitized and virtually altered, leaving only the forlorn loss of a medium that will have lost its cold-in-hand physical feel in favor for the mobile, ultra-portable, if not colder, virtual world.