Stop the presses?
The fate of newspapers has long been debated. The Huffington Post lists many articles tracking their decline. My colleague Brain Dipert reports here that he has canceled his subscription to the Sacramento Bee, and as he notes, our own news-centric publication Electronic News has transitioned from newsprint to online-only in daily e-newsletter format. He has compile his own list of articles tracking print’s decline.
Now, in the Huffington Post, author and communications consultant James Moore says its time for all newspaper publishers to stop the presses: “There comes a time to stop fretting and make a decision. The great angst over the future of newspaper journalism has become an unnecessary expenditure of energy…. The only option is to act now and take control and help the future get here ahead of schedule. Do the obvious: shut down the printing presses.”
Why now? Moore says, “As long as there is a print version of the local paper or the New York Times or LA Times, advertisers will keep buying space in the paper. If it goes away, they have nowhere to purchase those ads other than on the paper’s Web site. Sure, some of them may try radio or TV or another internet site but not enough to ruin a paper’s finances.”
As for me, I don’t subscribe to any newspapers. I read several on my cell phone while on the way to and from work. (No, not while I’m driving. I generally take a bus.) I still like print magazines and books. I’ve tried reading novels on my cell phone, but I’ve not found that too enjoyable. I’ve not tried a Kindle or other electronic book, however. The current implementations don’t appeal to me.
I’m with Moore on the newspapers—stop the presses. But keep the print magazines and books, at least until an improved electronic reader comes along. What do you think?
Chris Gammell commented:
Chris Gammell commented:
Puneet Lakhi commented:
Meredith Poor commented:
