"The backbone of the content for many online journalism sites, of course,
comes from the legacy media organization-the printed newspaper or the
television newscast, for example."
When I thought about the newspaper and the transfer of information to the web, I started to feel bad for the little papers. The small-town newspapers that print family stories and high school football news. After reading the chapter on authoring and managing websites, it made me think about how easy it must be for media organizations like the New York Times to publish all of that information online and pimp it with bells and whistles. The little papers, however, that have small staffs and fewer stories, are faced with a big job putting everything online. True, the transfer of the stories, pictures, and addition of audio/video is pretty easy, but big papers have entire staffs of people just doing the online stuff. If you look at the New York Times' website, there are videos, tons of links, and lists of any topic you can think of. I imagine the little paper, after a hard day's work, maybe having one staff member with the task of putting everything online. But, then again, people probably don't go to their hometown paper's website for the latest updates in news. More likely, they're going to the site for the photos of their children or the in-town classifieds.
Pimped MacBook Pro photo from Lussorian Luxury Homes and AccessoriesBesides all this, online journalism seems to be the pimped version of print. There are so many cool things to see online that you could never get in print. And, everything is two seconds away with a click of your mouse. I don't see why people fear the end of print journalism. Advances in technology are getting more and more frequent with better and faster opportunities. That just means journalists will get to tell more stories, faster, to a bigger audience around the world. Is that so bad?
No comments:
Post a Comment