Thread: The Future of Mass Media

We all know the future of mass media involves the internet. Thus far, all newspapers and publications that have made their news available only for a fee have failed colossally. A week or two ago, the New York Times announced that they would start a program in February in which people accessing their website would have to pay for content. I really don't see this ending well for the Times, because there is no reason to pay for news online when you can go to a plethora of other websites to find what you're looking for at no cost.

With all that said, a question arose in class the other day and my teacher explained: "Figure out a full proof way for media publications to make money via the internet and you'll be a very rich man."

I'm going to be that rich man.

There are two things that are killing mass media.

One, freedom of information. Pre-Internet, they held a stanglehold on information. But now there are (free) sources all over the web. And there are sources outside the US, too. In the past, you needed a lot of money to print a newspaper or broadcast a show, but now you just need a site to post on (and there are plenty of free sites). The downside to this is so much noise, but it's better than a stranglehold by sensationalist, agenda-pushing, douche bags.

Two, the quality of reporting has gone to shit. They no longer focus on reporting about what's happening now, they're reporting on what may happen in the future. Also, how much of what is reported in generated by any given organization? Not much, it's picked up by one reporting source (and not just news agencies, i.e. wikileaks) and passed on ad nauseum. Reporters are no longer central to new agencies.

There are many more reasons why the suck, but those are two of the big ones.