The transition from print to online journalism is underway.
Blogging, tweeting and all other forms of social networking are taking over. We’ve reached a point where it appears to be too late to stop the change.
As a result, newspapers are scared. The emotional attachment to newspapers is understandable, and so is the personal preference. But, in the long run, the complete transition to online mediums may not be such a bad thing, even for publications.
As staff editors and writers for The Daily Cougar, we understand both sides of the spectrum.
Writers are worried about their voices, sentence structure and overall style. Editors are more concerned with the overall finished product of the paper and understand cuts have to be made because of space constrictions and breaking news.
The transition may allow editors and writers to get along better, be at each others’ throats less and maybe even accomplish more.
Sure, newspapers have a euphoric sense about them. To some, the idea of reading the news on a laptop in the morning rather than sitting down at the breakfast table with a tangible piece of paper to fold, highlight and read is preposterous. But this is a transition the industry must make to stay alive and more importantly, stay relevant.
Because blogs and Web sites are so easy to create, maintain and advertise, it appears archaic that some people still receive their news from newspapers that they pick up off their front lawn.
Breaking news can be instantly shared via television, Internet and phone. This transition is also quite favorable with young people. If they are reading the news, it can’t be a bad thing.
The transition will also make more information readily available to the public, educating more people about what goes on in our cities, states, nation and world.
The only downside is that we still have to figure out how to pay for all of this.
