
With the topsy-turvy nature of our economy lately, it's no surprise change is finally knocking on the media industry's door. In a Market Watch article today, Jon Friedman explains that another side effect of the times has lead to the decreased value of media celebrity, with CNBC's Jonathan Wald as a cautionary tale.
But what really bothered me was the following logic:
What this means to the public is that journalism quality is going to sink. TV stations will try to hire younger, less experienced, less sophisticated news professionals as a way to keep costs down.Did Friedman really just say that? Yes, yes he did. An eternal optimist and relentless advocate for giving new talent a chance, I have many qualms with the above paragraph.
- One: Okay, okay - journalism will change because of the influx of novice reporters. But that's a good thing. Journalism has been in dire need of a makeover for some time. We're no longer living in an era of good ole boy newsrooms with reporters old enough to be my grandfather. Somehow, the industry missed that headline.
- Two: Fresh minds mean fresh ideas. For example, maybe we'll see more integration with social media, like Twitter feedback from viewers on the ticker at the bottom of the screen.
- Three: What if Barbara Walters was never given a chance? Even the great Miss O herself was once wet behind the ears. Point is, there are bright, eager journalists out there with brilliant ideas but without a platform from which to execute them.
Here's where I see journalism:
ReplyDelete1.) Less revenue
2.) More investigative reporting from young and old alike
Reason being:
Local lifestyle, sports, etc. is being covered continiously by bloggers. So, the edge that print newspapers will have will be what journalism was in the beginning: investigative.
Read this post by Seth Godin: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/01/when-newspapers.html
i agree!!!!!
ReplyDelete