Annalee Newitz’s last article started me thinking. She talks about the fact that companies seem to be investing in new uses for paper, since print is not working that well anymore, but nobody tries to re-use good journalists.
I don’t think paper will disappear that fast. Most book readers will agree with me that you can’t read a good novel, or even a computing book in PDF format. A newspaper is way better to spill coffee on at the breakfast table than an electronic device.
There’s been harbingers of doom in the form of the Sony Reader, or e-paper products. But Reader-like products will not convince anyone as long as it costs more than a paper book to download an e-book. I haven’t seen anything like hype surrounding these items.
The reason could be that they address a need that is already being fully addressed by paper print. People naturally resist change, so you need a minimum increment in functionality to justify switching.
So paper and print is not about to disappear. OK, let’s come to her second point: the cutting loose of skilled journalist. I quote Annalee:
I live in a world where corporations care more about the future of paper than the futures of people who have made their living turning paper into a massive network of vital, important communications. This is not how technological change should work.
Aye sister. Newsflash: big companies work like that. Cost-cutting. Profit, not people.
And i think there is a market for good writers, on paper or online. They might not have a steady income. But isn’t this the case for most journalists anyway ? A happy few have found a comfy full-time spot in a newspaper office (often with a little help from their friends), but most freelance for years.
If you’re a good writer, you will be noticed – most of us online writers are amateurs. If you’re not a good writer, you should do something else anyway.
Online writing has an additional level of freedom: no big investment required, so the edition will not automatically be in the hand of big capital. And you have a potentially worldwide audience.
So i think Annalee Newitz is right in complaining about how our society works, but not in bemoaning the fate of journalists. I’m not a economic Darwinist, but evolution could, in this case, be a good thing.
