(This entry is cross-posted at Tomorrow’s News, Tomorrow’s Journalists.) 

With the rapid changes affecting the media, and in particular the newsroom, one might be forgiven for thinking that “new media” is the future- and it may well be. But to assume that this is a distinct entity from the traditional and professional press is to ignore the innovative nature of the industry.

The current downturn in the circulation figures of print media is a secondary concern to journalistic organisations- the real threat to the longevity of established media is the associated decrease in advertising revenue. After all, the paltry fee paid by the end consumer does not alone pay for the production of a printed paper, and the wages of the assorted journalists, designers, and technicians. Advertising is the life blood of the media, and it seems to be spending more and more on digital outlets. Here we are, on the brink of another evolution of the media, just as important as the evolution of low-cost, high-volume printing, or the introduction of the news photograph. One in which traditional print and broadcast media will have to compete with the mammoth entity that is the online world for advertising revenue.

Or will they?

It is far too easy to think of “traditional media” and “new media” as separate corporate entities. But this simply isn’t the case.

Reuters, BBC, Fox, The New York Times, etc, etc, all have a powerful online presence, but they’re still the same companies we know, and they still possess the massive resources, history and experience we expect. The early pioneers of the internet medium proved there was money to be made there, and their innovations have been appropriated by their older brothers, while their failures have been avoided. The slow-to-learn attitude amongst the major players is not neccessarily a negative, since, quite simply, they can afford to wait. The movement away from paid-for content to free advertising-driven online editions, both among established newspapers and other media such as television networks (many of whom now provide online streaming of popular shows) demonstrates that the big boys are learning to play the game, and play it well.

It’s been done, folks

Nowhere is this unification of traditional and modern form more apparent than at the Los Angeles Times, which, believe it or not, is making enough money from its online revenue to keep the whole company, print edition included, afloat. As noted by Jeff Jarvis in the above linked post, this evolution is not without a substantial cost, namely the effective halving of that paper’s newsroom staff:

For years, I’ve heard editors demand to know when this internet thing would pay for their newsrooms. Never, I always responded. Your days as an oligopolist are over, I’ve said, and the scale of the news business and your newsroom will inevitably shrink. Now, perhaps, they’ve shrunk enough.

This can and will be looked upon as a tragedy by some student journalists, as they watch prospective jobs disappear, but that view demonstrates a short-sightedness. There will be jobs. The professional media are not finished. They are merely taking the next step in their evolution.

That’s not to say that there will not be winners among the start-ups. There almost certainly will be. Nor is it to say that every major news organisation will survive unscathed. But my point here is that to see the emergence of new technology as the harbinger of death for traditionla media is one extreme point of view, and one that is expressed so frequently that it requires a response.

I adore the traditional print form- the smell and oil of newsprint, and the way it adheres to your fingertips. And I dare say there’s still room in the market for it, at least for a while. But to appease our romantic ideals is not why we are journalists. We are journalists because we believe that a reliable, professional, and responsible press is important. And if we have to move with the times to keep providing that service to the public, as we almost certainly will have to, so be it.

Posted by Dave Molloy in •Business •Journalism

Comments:

Add a Comment: