As I was reading this week's assigned chapters from Here Comes Everybody by Clay Shirky, chapter three triggered my memory about a recent article from the Tallahassee Democrat newspaper. (Ironically, the only reason I had stumbled across this news article was because a Facebook friend had posted a link, not because I had actually been reading the paper.)
The title of the June 23rd article read, "Today, we announce a historic change in how we do business." The basic premise of the article was that effective June 30th, the Democrat would be asking website visitors to pay for a subscription to access online news content. I wish I could link back to the article from this blog, but since it is now July I can't view the article anymore without paying for it. The online comments in response to the article were particularly insightful into public opinion, because there was a very tangible divide between those who supported or opposed this decision. Those in support felt that the fees were reasonable (only $9.95 per month at most) and that journalism companies are selling a "product" that the public should have to pay for just like any other business or manufacturing company.
The title of the June 23rd article read, "Today, we announce a historic change in how we do business." The basic premise of the article was that effective June 30th, the Democrat would be asking website visitors to pay for a subscription to access online news content. I wish I could link back to the article from this blog, but since it is now July I can't view the article anymore without paying for it. The online comments in response to the article were particularly insightful into public opinion, because there was a very tangible divide between those who supported or opposed this decision. Those in support felt that the fees were reasonable (only $9.95 per month at most) and that journalism companies are selling a "product" that the public should have to pay for just like any other business or manufacturing company.
I tend to side with the other half of the divide that opposes this decision, and here is why. In the past, I always used the Tallahassee Democrat as my immediate go-to news source for local information and now I can't. But just because I've been a loyal supporter in the past doesn't mean I'm willing to start paying for their service; it just means that I'm going to start looking for free news elsewhere, such as television broadcasting, TV station websites, radio, local bloggers, Facebook updates, word of mouth, etc. And, I'm probably not the only person thinking about doing this.
In chapter three, Shirky reflects that many media outlets did not intially conceive of the Internet as competition to traditional journalism. However, mix up an economic recession with exponetial social media growth and cheap-to-free constant Internet access and you have a perfect storm for not only competition, but also potential to become completely obsolete. Today, anyone can be a journalist and publisher in some sense and news is becoming more and more accessible.
Shirky asks, "What happens when the costs of reproduction and distribution go away? What happens when there's nothing unique about publishing anymore, because users can do it for themselves?" One answer seems to be that local newspapers will disintegrate because there is simply no longer a need or demand.
I fear for the future of the Tallahassee Democrat. What do you think?
Shirky asks, "What happens when the costs of reproduction and distribution go away? What happens when there's nothing unique about publishing anymore, because users can do it for themselves?" One answer seems to be that local newspapers will disintegrate because there is simply no longer a need or demand.
I fear for the future of the Tallahassee Democrat. What do you think?
