This article was actually written the week after the election but I thought it was really interesting so I posted it. Basically it talks about how all newspapers and magazines underestimated how much to order from the presses after the election. Many print media outlets had to create waiting lists for copies until the publishers could print more. In the last few years, the Internet and 24 hour news networks have been more popular than traditional print media in regard to the news. An event as large as this particular election is just what print media needed to revitalize their industry. People do not want mementos on their computers, tangible items are desired. The headline, "Can Obama Save the Media", is an expectation that with a historical story unfolding people will want to commemorate it all in print. I don't know if I agree. I think election day was a single exception. Everything Obama does will not be worthy of ordering extra copies to save. He will be performing the same acts as any other presidents. How do other people feel about print media and it's struggle compared to the Internet and 24 hour news networks? I thought this was particularly pertinent since we are all blogging from stories found on Internet sites created off successful print publications.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/168933?tid=relatedcl
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't think Obama has the ability to save the print media any more than any other president would. I understand how the election and the inauguration were historical events which people wanted to remember by capturing it in print, but besides that, I think that people are going to continue to get their news the same way they normally would. I don't think it's at all about what's being printed that determines how people want to access their news, it's more about convenience and preference. While some prefer to check the news on their laptops or watch it on tv, there are a lot of people that still prefer to sit at a table or in a recliner with the paper. It's also a matter of cost for some, especially in times like these. For example, one of the reason's I chose to follow Time Magazine for my blog, besides the fact that I enjoy reading it, was because my roommate already had a subscription and I wouldn't have to pay for it. Even though I could access it free on the internet, I would much rather have the magazine in print.
ReplyDeleteBesides the growing popularity of the internet in general, I think the appeal of accessing the news through the internet to many people is the ability to control what news one receives. A person can just pick and choose which articles they want to read by clicking a mouse, rather than sorting through an entire magazine or newspaper that they most likely had to pay for if they only wanted to read a certain article or two. It's a lot like how people's taste in owning music has changed with technology. People's tastes are going to change over time, so rather than trying to save the print media, they should focus more on how to profit off of new preferences while maintaining print as best they can.