Print
journalism is morphing into the plaything of, respectively, the owners of Amazon, the Boston Red Sox baseball team and an international digital corporation.
The
direction has been clear for decades. News is instantaneous now on the Web and
24/7 cable, and waiting for context and coherence until the next day or weekend
does not appeal to impatient new generations anxious to tweet or text their
reactions.
The President
explains his closure of embassies under Middle East terror threats to Jay Leno,
with the certainty that Americans will learn what he has to say within minutes.
In the past century, the social critic Lewis Mumford observed that journalism was
moving ever faster and creating “deprivation by surfeit.”
Like
other assembly-line industries that concentrate on speed and productivity, the
manufacture of news has ignored “the need for evaluation, correction, selection
and social assimilation.”
Hand-made
objects are a thing of the past. We get news like fast food and with just about
the same amounts of nutrition and flavor.
As we
congratulate ourselves for being so quickly well-informed, do we ask, “Of
what?”
As old
media names slide toward quaintness and irrelevance, we might give a passing
thought, or tweet, to whether or not we will miss what they used to bring us.
In an interview, he slaps his palm on a table to emphasize that the paper is “Not. For. Sale.”
Update: All this old-media shuffling
prompts Arthur Sulzberger Jr., chairman of The New York Times Company to
announce emphatically that the Times itself
will remain in the hands of his family into “our global and digital future.”
In an interview, he slaps his palm on a table to emphasize that the paper is “Not. For. Sale.”
Not.
Yet.
1 comment:
And the problem exacerbates other areas of this society as that information reaches millions who are not taught the art of critical thought.
Post a Comment