Repeat after me. Newspaper ≠ journalism. Journalism ⊃ newspaper.
Why a once-profitable industry suddenly seems as outmoded as America’s automakers is a tale that involves arrogance, mistakes, eroding trust and the rise of a digital world in which newspapers feel compelled to give away their content.
“Most of the wounds are self-inflicted,” says Phil Bronstein, editor at large of the San Francisco Chronicle, which Hearst Corp. has threatened to close unless major cost savings are achieved or a buyer is found. Rather than engage the audience, he says, “the public was seen as kind of messy and icky and not something you needed to get involved with.” — Howard Kurtz, Washington Post
Representing the Humanities at Accepted Students Day.
The daughter opens another show. This weekend only.
After learning of his AIDS diagnosis, artist Keith Haring created the work, "Unfinished Painting" (1989),…
Seton Hill students Emily Vohs, Elizabeth Burns, Jake Carnahan-Curcio and Carolyn Jerz in a scene…
Inspiration can come to those with the humblest heart. Caedmon the Cowherd believed he had…
View Comments
Broadcast TV is losing viewers, too, as it seems the target audience is increasingly prone to time-shifted their way away from commercials, or just surf randomly through YouTube.
From what I see, the UK papers are also financially strapped, though I imagine the tabloids will stay profitable by becoming even more driven by celebrity, royalty and sleaze (if that's possible).
A question I've been wondering: Does this trend hold true across the globe, or is it culturally-specific to mostly the US? I'd say television has as much to do with this trend as the internet, by the way. Are they next to go, or is the net next to be subsumed by the TV model?