It’s said that print is dead and it’s said that print isn’t dead.
People claim books will be replaced by readers, yet books seem to thrive (or at least, have other value – a published book being more notable than a published ebook – which is easy to do)
Society talks about how News and newspaper is struggling or failing, and indeed, few are racing to subscribe to get the old national or global news in paper, but it seems people enjoy local magazines and the community newspaper. Is it that newspaper (news media) doesn’t know how to operate and remain relevant and valuable in our new world or that it really is dying off?
If it’s about digital vs print, we actually can see paintings of Da Vinchi online at anytime, for example, Mona Lisa painting, but people would not stare at the screen to enjoy it. Going to a museum and seeing the Mona Lisa on the wall is still an irreplaceable experience. Maybe it’s not the latest ‘news’, but any piece of a story, or even an ‘old news’ on a print, would make human brain functional. At least the reader would not be distracted by a pop-up ads or message.
My two cents, but there is only Post ‘Answer’ button below. LOL
Three reasons newsprint should never die (where it is dying, it’s because the people running that newspaper have no idea what they’re doing; blaming digital is a scapegoat):
- People like tangible paper. Holding my screen all the time is heavy, hot, small, and bright. I also can’t turn the page, highlight something, rip out news to save it, or dog ear something for later
- Screens impact our mental health. They strain our eyes, make it difficult to sleep, distract us with other things, and are a bit addictive
- “Local” news generally really sucks online because there isn’t a decent way to find it. Local events, concerts, sales, politics, etc., generally suck at doing online well. A local paper gets hyper-local, community news, pushed right to my door.