Barbara Campos takes a look at the ongoing conversation surrounding the decline of print journalism, and what lies in store for audiences when it is eventually replaced.
BUYING newspapers is starting to seem like a thing of the past; our generation will remember it as something our parents did. Even the over-50s are spending less time reading papers and magazines than in previous years.
To be fair, buying a newspaper or magazine may seem unnecessary when everything is available online in sites like Buzzfeed (its name itself is indicative of ‘churnalism’ – the practice of republishing work by other news outlets) and the Huffington Post.
Even reputable newspapers like the Guardian, for example, offer all of their articles for free online. But the question is very serious: what will be the consequences when the Guardian, the Irish Times, the New Yorker, among many others, cease to be published and when there are no longer journalists to report on our societies?
The internet and social media have been responsible for most of the changes in the way we receive information. On Facebook and Twitter, there is endless information bombarded onto our news-feeds. This information is based on likes and dislikes, in other words, cookies, which are responsible for all personalised content in the websites you visit.
For example, if you look at Doc Martens online, you may find that suddenly there will be an ad featuring them on your feed. It’s not just advertising that works like this: news articles on Facebook reflect the users’ views, so if a person is of a conservative leaning, it is very unlikely, for example, that they will read articles that criticise the 2016 US Republican candidate, Donald Trump.
Furthermore, technology has increased the speed in which we expect to receive information — ‘churnalism’ becomes ‘ideal’ for our age of quick reads, no longer do people seem to be willing to read articles that are more than 600 words long. ‘Churnalism’ exists in sites that gather information published by reputable news outlets. It is, essentially, recycling and condensing other work. This is not entirely negative, better to be engaged than not but without other sources this type of ‘journalism’ dies.
“This information is based on likes and dislikes, in other words, cookies, which are responsible for all personalised content in the websites you visit.”
It also means that sites that are most popular with younger people – Buzzfeed and the Huffpost – have very few employees. There are only a few regular contributors and editors who guarantee the content released is reliable. If this model is perpetuated there will soon be no journalists, which also means that ‘churnalism’ is at risk too, as they are heavily dependent on the ‘raw material’ of other papers.
Traditional newspapers have had some difficulty with surpassing the ever growing technological world. Most ask for subscriptions to access content online, and those that do not have to rely heavily on online advertising. This has become problematic as sometimes the money made here doesn’t cover all the expenses for printing, distributing, and salaries.
The Guardian which, up until recently, has remained free of charge have started considering alternatives — like only publishing at weekends, and charging for their online content. It is fundamental to understand that the traditional news outlets are responsible for some of the most important pieces of investigative journalism in the last century, and in our time too. In ‘70s the Washington Post was responsible for uncovering the attempt to bug the DNC, which eventually lead to the resignation of President Nixon.
As recently as this year there have been cases when journalism shaped the way we see the world –- the Panama Papers, for example. Without the press, and specifically the International Consortium of Independent Journalists (ICIJ), the leak could still have happened, but it was through a joint effort of several newspapers that the information was analysed, and ‘translated’ in a way we could all understand.
Journalism has its problems, in recent years there has been a concern in having equal representation in papers, not just in gender, but class — a recent article in the Guardian correctly points out that journalism is a white male-dominated world.
The work of journalists continues, nevertheless, to be important, and, perhaps, once the paradigm of white male culture is dealt with, a wider variety of people will start feeling that they are being represented in the media. There are other problems with journalism, but its work continues to be more insightful and compelling than the bullet point style of ‘churnalism’, and the limited scope of news feeds. Change is needed, otherwise newspapers and magazines will end up like vinyl: for hipsters and nostalgic family relatives
Advertisements