This is not your father's morning paper
Newspapers are vintage, and vintage is cool. But as with record players, rotary dial telephones and typewriters, have newspapers become something that people use merely for the novelty of feeling as if they are living in the past? Print media is commonly referred to as ‘old media’ these days, but does that mean print journalism will eventually to die from its old age?
One of the biggest problems that today’s news audiences have with print media is its environmental impact. In this post-An Inconvenient Truth (Guggenhiem, 2006) world, basically everything that is produced is doing so in an eco-friendly way, either to appease an (finally) eco-conscious audience, or to stay in line with new environmental laws. Although most newspapers and magazines are printed on recycled paper, they still demand an incredible amount of trees to produce; in America alone, over 500,000 trees are needed to produce just one Sunday’s newspapers.
On top of that, other factors like the pollution caused by the trucks transporting them and the heavy press machinery required in order to publish them each day could make even the most passionate newspaper-enthusiast question their necessity. Also, in keeping with my previous entry suggesting that print journalists could stand to learn a thing or two from bloggers and online reporters, it doesn’t seem that there would be much of a commute when working as a blogger; could print media, and mainstream media generally, compensate for the larger emissions produced in their line of work by not having an on-the-scene reporter for all of the foreign and non-local stories they cover?
I have mentioned in earlier entries that most newspapers have online counterparts, either to publish their articles on a more widely available medium, or to better receive instant reader feedback. For many of these news outlets, their websites are also testing grounds for any possible presentational or structural changes that could be made to their newspaper. Many of the visual changes made to newspapers are done so subtly, as if the publishers are “tweaking” (Campaign, 2008) so as not to make for a jarring experience for the more conservative, traditionalist readers.
This could suggest that newspapers are simply catering to older generations nowadays, following the cliché that older people are just not familiar with newer technology whilst younger people are much more adjusted to the changing habits of receiving news. Does that mean that newspapers are going to be completely phased out within the generational shift?
In an Australian context, I don’t think newspapers are going the way of plastic bags anytime soon. Many areas of Australia, especially rural and remote areas, have poor access to decent broadband services (if they’re lucky), or simply have no internet connectivity at all. Personally, having lived most of my life in country South Australia, I can’t see how print media could be phased out of the public’s daily routine anytime soon; going to the store to buy The Advertiser is still faster than any broadband service available in Port Pirie.
The internet filter that has been proposed by the Federal Government (and discussed earlier here) is also something that could stand in the way of online news’ rise to dominance in Australia. If internet performance and accessibility is going to be further hindered in this country, then the public is going to feel much less inclined to use it for their daily news consumption.
If newspapers are old-fashioned, unprogressive and environmentally harmful, is Australia those things also by forcing Australians to stick with them?
One of the biggest problems that today’s news audiences have with print media is its environmental impact. In this post-An Inconvenient Truth (Guggenhiem, 2006) world, basically everything that is produced is doing so in an eco-friendly way, either to appease an (finally) eco-conscious audience, or to stay in line with new environmental laws. Although most newspapers and magazines are printed on recycled paper, they still demand an incredible amount of trees to produce; in America alone, over 500,000 trees are needed to produce just one Sunday’s newspapers.
On top of that, other factors like the pollution caused by the trucks transporting them and the heavy press machinery required in order to publish them each day could make even the most passionate newspaper-enthusiast question their necessity. Also, in keeping with my previous entry suggesting that print journalists could stand to learn a thing or two from bloggers and online reporters, it doesn’t seem that there would be much of a commute when working as a blogger; could print media, and mainstream media generally, compensate for the larger emissions produced in their line of work by not having an on-the-scene reporter for all of the foreign and non-local stories they cover?
I have mentioned in earlier entries that most newspapers have online counterparts, either to publish their articles on a more widely available medium, or to better receive instant reader feedback. For many of these news outlets, their websites are also testing grounds for any possible presentational or structural changes that could be made to their newspaper. Many of the visual changes made to newspapers are done so subtly, as if the publishers are “tweaking” (Campaign, 2008) so as not to make for a jarring experience for the more conservative, traditionalist readers.
This could suggest that newspapers are simply catering to older generations nowadays, following the cliché that older people are just not familiar with newer technology whilst younger people are much more adjusted to the changing habits of receiving news. Does that mean that newspapers are going to be completely phased out within the generational shift?
In an Australian context, I don’t think newspapers are going the way of plastic bags anytime soon. Many areas of Australia, especially rural and remote areas, have poor access to decent broadband services (if they’re lucky), or simply have no internet connectivity at all. Personally, having lived most of my life in country South Australia, I can’t see how print media could be phased out of the public’s daily routine anytime soon; going to the store to buy The Advertiser is still faster than any broadband service available in Port Pirie.
The internet filter that has been proposed by the Federal Government (and discussed earlier here) is also something that could stand in the way of online news’ rise to dominance in Australia. If internet performance and accessibility is going to be further hindered in this country, then the public is going to feel much less inclined to use it for their daily news consumption.
If newspapers are old-fashioned, unprogressive and environmentally harmful, is Australia those things also by forcing Australians to stick with them?