New York Times columnist
Frank Rich makes a startling semi-prediction in
his Sunday column: "Four years from now, it’s entirely possible that some, even many, of the newspapers and magazines covering this campaign won’t exist in their current form, if they exist at all. The Big Three network evening newscasts, and network news divisions as we now know them, may also be extinct by then."
I was surprised to read that comment, even though I've been saying much the same thing in speaking to various groups across the state. It's Rich's timeline that I find surprising. Four years from now? 2012?
There's not doubt that the tidal wave called the Internet has already floundered plenty of what the blogging community loves to call "MSM", as in Mainstream Media. Last month
The Montgomery Advertiser reported 20 positions would be eliminated, including ten filled with real live breathing employees.Other outlets are in a careening* stage, sitting on the sidelines, trying to overhaul their operations to extend their useful lives as other vessels pass them by. For many, I'm afraid that will be rearranging the deck chairs. Small weekly newspapers have survived because there's nothing on the Net to replace the hyper-local information services they provide to their readers. Some of the large daily's have kept their head above water, adding video and slide shows to their websites, but still holding onto the very expensive process of chopping down trees to produce physical "papers" to toss into front yards using $4 gasoline to do so.
But is
The Times' Rich right? When the next round of would-be presidents are clamoring for your attention in four years, will it be an almost all digital campaign? With those who are text-poor and print dependent left behind?
*I came across the original meaning of the word
careening during research for an upcoming APT documentary. Ships would use the tides to intentionally lay their ships on their sides to allow the crew to clean the hull. The more modern meaning:
To lurch or swerve while in motion works pretty well in the context of this story to describe the movement of traditional media toward that next election cycle and beyond. Hold on tight.
I was surprised to read that comment, even though I've been saying much the same thing in speaking to various groups across the state. It's Rich's timeline that I find surprising. Four years from now? 2012?
There's not doubt that the tidal wave called the Internet has already floundered plenty of what the blogging community loves to call "MSM", as in Mainstream Media. Last month The Montgomery Advertiser reported 20 positions would be eliminated, including ten filled with real live breathing employees.Other outlets are in a careening* stage, sitting on the sidelines, trying to overhaul their operations to extend their useful lives as other vessels pass them by. For many, I'm afraid that will be rearranging the deck chairs. Small weekly newspapers have survived because there's nothing on the Net to replace the hyper-local information services they provide to their readers. Some of the large daily's have kept their head above water, adding video and slide shows to their websites, but still holding onto the very expensive process of chopping down trees to produce physical "papers" to toss into front yards using $4 gasoline to do so.
But is The Times' Rich right? When the next round of would-be presidents are clamoring for your attention in four years, will it be an almost all digital campaign? With those who are text-poor and print dependent left behind?
*I came across the original meaning of the word careening during research for an upcoming APT documentary. Ships would use the tides to intentionally lay their ships on their sides to allow the crew to clean the hull. The more modern meaning: To lurch or swerve while in motion works pretty well in the context of this story to describe the movement of traditional media toward that next election cycle and beyond. Hold on tight.
No comments:
Post a Comment