Newspaper ownership's new model

  • Article by: Virginia Postrel , Bloomberg News
  • Updated: August 6, 2013 - 7:11 PM

Journalism's new model could dispense with objectivity in favor of diversity and a focus on what readers want.

  • 7
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 7 of 7
tuttifruttiAug. 7, 13 6:10 AM

The term newspaper is quickly becoming irrelevant. All media will be digital. When was the last time you actually dialed a number? That term applied to rotary dial phones. The terms will live on forever, but isn't it interesting how the terms are used by generations that have never actually read a real newspaper or dialed a rotary dial phone.

3
1
owatonnabillAug. 7, 13 6:47 AM

All the deep philosophical analysis and self-serving philanthropic idealism aside, couldn't one just assume that the role of newspaper is to...well, print news? On Paper? Americans are fleeing the major elephants in this room because those elephants print the precise opposite: a whole lot of us are pretty tired of being told what to think. Can anyone name even ONE major newspaper that prints--well--news, and then lets the reader form his/her own opinion? Instead, we get "news" stories that are filled with innuendo, political correctness, and both obvious and not-so-obvious attempts to shape our thinking. What is the reader's perception if the phrase used to describe a certain politician is either "aging politician" vs. "venerable statesman"? Both, and hundreds of like examples, can be used with impunity depending on the mental picture you want the reader to have. The one gives the impression of a doddering fat old guy who drools into his oatmeal and has to be prepped exhaustively by his handlers just to be presentable enough to show up, and who has a real problem stringing more than three coherent words together. The other gives us a mental image of, say, Winston Churchill--profound, dignified, witty (if at times acerbic) in analysis. But the point is, if your goal is to present only news, that NEITHER should be used. The fact that this is so rarely the case is precisely the reason that, in owatonnabill's opinion, so many major newspapers in this country are failing so fast. Newspapers more and more are seen as merely mouthpieces for this-or-that political point of view. and a lot of Americans who can actually think, resent that.

2
4
owatonnabillAug. 7, 13 7:15 AM

"The term newspaper is quickly becoming irrelevant. All media will be digital." .................. This is very true, and at the same time scary as hell. Though ancillary to the point (and for that reason this post will probably not make it past the Thought Police) it is part and parcel of just what the role of newspaper actually IS in our world today. We have the thoughts of the Pharoahs in our possession today because they were chiseled in granite four millennia ago. We have records of Phoenician merchants because the communication of the day was to put lists, inventory, etc. onto soft clay tablets which then hardened, and many have survived to this day. Today? Well, how long does a DVD last? Or what happens if a cataclysm occurs and the technology (and the knowledge) to reproduce the gizmos needed to play those DVDs disappears? Granite survives cataclysms. Digital recording does not. Is owatonnabill suggesting that the next issue of the Strib be chiseled onto a stone tablet and dropped off on your porch with a thunk loud enough to wake up the guy across the street? Nope. But at the same time we need to consider that technological part of written and spoken communication today could be a major part of it's eventual demise, and if that happens, what survives? Not the major point but at the same time something worth thinking about.

0
3
jjsbrwAug. 7, 13 7:33 AM

owatonnabillAug. 7, 136:47 AM The fact that this is so rarely the case is precisely the reason that, in owatonnabill's opinion, so many major newspapers in this country are failing so fast. Newspapers more and more are seen as merely mouthpieces for this-or-that political point of view. and a lot of Americans who can actually think, resent that. ----------------------------------- Yeah, right. Or maybe newspapers can't compete with free. Which explanation seems more likely?

6
0
elmore1Aug. 7, 13 9:26 AM

"It means, first of all, abandoning the monolithic norms established by American metropolitan dailies." - This is a great trend and with many sources of news, will require readers to sort through information and increasingly form their own opinions and conclusions and not what the local newspaper tells them.

1
2
FrankLAug. 7, 13 2:49 PM

My guess the reason we see so many chicken little articles on the demise of newspapers is that the editorial departments will be the most impacted. No longer will they be able sit in their ivory tower and write opinions that are divorced from reality and seem to be more designed to insult their readers.

0
1
tooty123Aug. 8, 1312:06 PM

How is digital any more "news" than a paper copy? It is simply in another format. The digital news articles would be the same in print! How many who use digital news actually read several different news to get another perspective? Very few, just like read several different newspapers for a different perspective. Although I subscribe to the digital Star Tribune, I prefer the print copy. The same goes for books, magazines, etc. online. Also, going to the book store is a way of finding books I would not know to search for online. Technology is fine until it so mundane you don't use it after awhile.

1
0
  • 1 - 7 of 7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT