President Obama makes many good points in the interview with Dave Murray about how critical the role of the newspaper is in our democracy, but personally I don’t agree with “bailouts” in general. It is a valid point that if media went all online there’s a good chance it’ll just turn into opinions with no real fact-based stories, and nothing being regulated the way it is in a physical newspaper. All of that makes sense, but in my opinion the more bailouts the government gives, the larger our national debt will be. We as a country already have an enormous debt from the Iraq war, and already numerous bailouts have been given to some unworthy companies such as AIG. I think companies should be forced to deal with these tough economic times on their own. With the government interfering with businesses now, that’s not fair to other companies which suffered before this recession. Just because numerous companies are failing at once doesn’t mean the government should step in and give them all large sums of money. However, I agree with Obama’s idea of turning newspapers into “nonprofit organizations” which would give the companies tax breaks, making it easier to survive during these times. It is sad that so many journalists have been laid off and lost their jobs, but people lose their jobs everyday in the U.S. and are forced to figure things out. It is a nice idea that everything could work out so perfectly, but the debt is just getting bigger and bigger.
President Obama makes a lot of keen points when discussing the importance of the newspapers in our world. He explains that newspapers are what gives people true factual context and that many times the online world leaves more opinions, he goes to explain that the direction of the news online seems to be more like a blog, which i concur.
While I do believe keeping newspapers is important, aiding the newspapers isn't going to change the rapid trend of retaining information through online sources. All power relies in the people, and there won't be laws forcing people to read a paper, so with the growth of generations being born into a technology filled world, the newspaper industry will slowly and surely fad away.
Noting that the newer generations are being born into such a world, I want to write that my cousin is only 5 years old and can navigate on a computer! That's crazy, now take a step back and think to when you were 5, could you play with a computer. Everything around children supports them in using technology, television shows such as nickelodeon and books such as Dr. Zeus all give children websites to explore to expand their mind while having fun. And if the people in this world can get it for free than awesome!
President Obama states, "if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that." I think it's absolutely absurd, to charge people money to read about what is going on in our community and world. Our economy is suffering already, so he wants to find another thing to charge people with, I don't think that will make it better!
Maybe rather then spending money on aiding newspapers, the money can go to helping innocent people get out of debt, or college students that the music industry is targeting for uploading music, or getting homeless people off the street. That sounds a lot more important than aiding a newspaper.
I feel that newspapers are the foundation of journalism. By foundation, I mean that most newsrooms of television and radio, along with many bloggers, still begin their days by scanning the top stories covered by newspaper organizations.
If the government funds papers, the probability increases that an editor or reporter may hesitate before investigating an authority that signs the checks and wields massive power. The results could cascade into serious lapses in ethics throughout the other forms of media.
Journalists monitor the government and both must remain isolated from each other; otherwise, it's possible that a government could get out of control.
Having bucked the recent trends of overgrowth and acquisitions, some local newspapers are in a better position to survive difficult times. This article reports on some economical, local papers:
When bloggers figure out how to earn money for their reporting and supplant newspapers by supplying regular, illuminating coverage of the same quality or better--then more power to them. Although, if local newspapers endure, potential online businesses could develop to collect and edit local, online-newspaper reporting and deliver it to larger audiences, for county and statewide audiences.
Although new technologies are on the rise, newspapers will always be a vital part of our community. It is true that people have forgotten the importance of newspapers. Many industries have gone out of business because most people resort to the Internet to catch up on the media.
I agree with Obama that journalism and newspapers play an important role in American society. Journalists opened the public to news and became the core of the media.
People do not go out of their way to read the news anymore. Instead, they can get any story with just a click of the button. However, newspapers cover breaking news stories that sometimes do not make it on the internet right away.
I think that people should have to pay for the news they read online because companies are letting go of many hard-working journalists. In this economic state, many people are losing their jobs and it is very tough to acknowledge that journalists are losing theirs to the internet. When did technology take over?
Although some may disagree with paying to read from the internet, it is no different from paying to read a book. Journalists are like authors; except their stories are real. Hard work goes into each story and if journalists and newspapers are not paid, it is almost as if they covered a story for no reason.
After reading editor Dave Murray’s article about Obama’s reasoning for the vital role that newspapers play for media today. I have to say that I disagree with him for wanting to keep the print version of newspapers alive. In today’s society children and parents are learning how to get their news through new ways of technology rather than a piece of paper. Our economy is already suffering from debts due to the war and other national problems, and Obama’s fight to save the newspaper as a media source when we already have many other ways to track news does not strike me as a problem that is worth fighting for.
In the article Obama states that, "What I hope is that people start understanding if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that." I agree with Obama’s statement, however many newspapers have already made the switch to posting their newspapers on the internet due to its availability and popularity to the public. If anything these newspaper companies are saving their money instead of wasting it on printing costs. Even though they may not be making as much as they once did, they continue to make a profit off of their news stories by setting up a payment plan for those who choose to access their news articles via internet.
Although it is sad to see the print version of newspapers fade away, it is for the better. Newspapers have been dwindling away for a good couple years now, and it’s time to face the facts and realize that our economy is continuing to grow as a technology based society. Obama who refers to himself as the “big newspaper junkie” needs to get with times and realize that this financial crisis is not worth fighting for.
I feel that a bailout for the newspaper industry could be a beneficial decision down the road however I believe there is more to be concerned with than this industry at the moment, especially when there are many other economical alternatives.
President Obama said, "I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding.”
I believe this to be a very true statement in saying that people can be misconceived by much of the content on the internet; however, I think that there should be a lot more forethought before a sum of the countries money goes into this.
There are many reputable news sources available online, as well as physical newspapers available online, and on portable devices. However people need to know what these trustworthy sources are and how to access them as opposed to personal blogs, and opinion based websites.
Many people including the future generations are more used to accessing news online because it has been available to them for most of their lifetime. Traditional print methods are not only is becoming obsolete, but also working against the “go-green” transformation we are trying to promote.
Overall I think that there should be some general concern for those journalists who are losing their jobs over the lack of profit from newspaper companies. We depend on these individuals to deliver to the public about news and important information going on around us.
Journalists need to get paid and in order for that to happen there has to be revenue coming from the news industry. This is a problem that does need to be addressed and perhaps a bailout is necessary to keep these journalists doing their job.
Despite having the ability to access news through a click of the mouse or touch of a screen, the desire for a ol' fashion newspaper isn't completely extinct. But in the economic struggle we face, the supply should only fit the demand and no bailout should be given.
The need for factual, non biased print news will be fulfilled by a select few newspapers. Although this will eliminate many jobs, our countries obsession for instant updates has only increased the need for legitimate writing just in alternative mediums. Like Obama said "If you're getting your newspaper over the internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find business model that supports that." Journalism must make the internet a profitable means to deliver the news.
I do agree with turning the newspaper industry into a nonprofit, granting them with tax breaks. It may be the boost newspapers need to keep printing but still isn't handing over millions of dollars our country simply doesn't have. At the end of the day, everybody has been effected by the economy and what makes newspapers more important than health care or education?
After reading Dave Murray's article on how Obama feels about the newspaper industry, you can see that the government is concerned with a lot of things based on this issue. They are trying to pass a legislation that will help the newspaper industry by providing certain tax breaks - I definitely admire President Obama's efforts to bailout the industry in some way!
The government should try and help the industry come back on it's feet. We should worry about what direction this generation's journalism is going however at the same time I believe there are immediate pressing matters that should be looked at first before trying to help a variety of industries at the same time. Till then the industry can work on better reporting through the internet.
As the economy stays stagnant and doesn't improve, a lot of businesses across the board are facing financial issues and are having to end up filing for bankruptcy or merging with different businesses in the same field. I believe that the newspaper industry is important to the people because they provide real news and stories for the world. I agree with President Obama when he mentions that if our news became all blogging or electronic it will be more opinionated than factual. Real journalism comes from printed stories that have fact, statistics as well a real storyline. As for readers, there are many readers across the world that still like to sit down with their favorite newspaper and read from front to back so if this stops, a big part of our life has been taken away from us. This being said, I do believe that goverment should provide a bailout plan for the newspaper industry.
However, at the same time aren't there other ongoing issues that the government should pay attention to first? For example, bringing back troops - if they have money for the newspaper industry, they certainly have money to bring troops back or in fact take care of other internal financial issues!
In a time where Facebook and Tweeting have almost instantly taken over the world of journalism, the print newspaper has seemingly become obsolete and not efficient. But where else can you get such in depth coverage? Such strongly-articulated opinions? In an age where instant gratification and real-time updates reign supreme, a well thought-out piece of reporting still cannot be beat. For once, I agree with President Obama: The newspaper industry is taken for granted, and should always remain in circulation. Especially with our economy in such dire straits, the last we should be doing is considering shutting down one of the oldest and largest industries in the country.
I agree with Obama when he says that the newspaper industry is being taken for granted, but I do not think that newpaper bailouts need to be the focus of Presidential speeches at this time.
There are other ways to help out the dwindling newspaper industry. "What I hope is that people start understanding if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that."
Obama is completely right. As long as we can find a way to implement payment plans for reading online articles, as many newspapers already have, the journalism, both independent and professional, field will still thrive.
I do not think that it is a bad thing that there are less and less printed newspapers being consumed. In a time where the focus of so many campaigns is to "Go Green" and use less paper when necessary to conserve the environment, maybe it is about time that we start getting all of our news from online newspapers.
Before he gets all his supporters to jump on a newspaper bailout bandwagon, we need to think about some of the other options we have and of some of the good that could potentially come out of the situation.
I can see the need for congress to intervene and bail out the newspaper industry, however, given the current debt situation, they shouldn’t take on the costly task all at once. It’s imperative that the public be able to access news that directly affects them, accurately and on time. I agree with President Obama’s concerns with the trend of news leading in the direction of blogs, away from fact checking, and towards confusion. A reliable source of information is vital to the publics well being. Though the newspaper industry as a whole needs work, the government aid should be spent keeping the trustworthy sources available to its people.
President Obama makes many good points in the interview with Dave Murray about how critical the role of the newspaper is in our democracy, but personally I don’t agree with “bailouts” in general. It is a valid point that if media went all online there’s a good chance it’ll just turn into opinions with no real fact-based stories, and nothing being regulated the way it is in a physical newspaper. All of that makes sense, but in my opinion the more bailouts the government gives, the larger our national debt will be. We as a country already have an enormous debt from the Iraq war, and already numerous bailouts have been given to some unworthy companies such as AIG. I think companies should be forced to deal with these tough economic times on their own. With the government interfering with businesses now, that’s not fair to other companies which suffered before this recession. Just because numerous companies are failing at once doesn’t mean the government should step in and give them all large sums of money. However, I agree with Obama’s idea of turning newspapers into “nonprofit organizations” which would give the companies tax breaks, making it easier to survive during these times. It is sad that so many journalists have been laid off and lost their jobs, but people lose their jobs everyday in the U.S. and are forced to figure things out. It is a nice idea that everything could work out so perfectly, but the debt is just getting bigger and bigger.
ReplyDeleteJohn Jacobs
President Obama makes a lot of keen points when discussing the importance of the newspapers in our world. He explains that newspapers are what gives people true factual context and that many times the online world leaves more opinions, he goes to explain that the direction of the news online seems to be more like a blog, which i concur.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do believe keeping newspapers is important, aiding the newspapers isn't going to change the rapid trend of retaining information through online sources. All power relies in the people, and there won't be laws forcing people to read a paper, so with the growth of generations being born into a technology filled world, the newspaper industry will slowly and surely fad away.
Noting that the newer generations are being born into such a world, I want to write that my cousin is only 5 years old and can navigate on a computer! That's crazy, now take a step back and think to when you were 5, could you play with a computer. Everything around children supports them in using technology, television shows such as nickelodeon and books such as Dr. Zeus all give children websites to explore to expand their mind while having fun. And if the people in this world can get it for free than awesome!
President Obama states, "if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that." I think it's absolutely absurd, to charge people money to read about what is going on in our community and world. Our economy is suffering already, so he wants to find another thing to charge people with, I don't think that will make it better!
Maybe rather then spending money on aiding newspapers, the money can go to helping innocent people get out of debt, or college students that the music industry is targeting for uploading music, or getting homeless people off the street. That sounds a lot more important than aiding a newspaper.
Samantha Andrade
I feel that newspapers are the foundation of journalism. By foundation, I mean that most newsrooms of television and radio, along with many bloggers, still begin their days by scanning the top stories covered by newspaper organizations.
ReplyDeleteIf the government funds papers, the probability increases that an editor or reporter may hesitate before investigating an authority that signs the checks and wields massive power. The results could cascade into serious lapses in ethics throughout the other forms of media.
Journalists monitor the government and both must remain isolated from each other; otherwise, it's possible that a government could get out of control.
Having bucked the recent trends of overgrowth and acquisitions, some local newspapers are in a better position to survive difficult times. This article reports on some economical, local papers:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204488304574431311916357526.html
When bloggers figure out how to earn money for their reporting and supplant newspapers by supplying regular, illuminating coverage of the same quality or better--then more power to them. Although, if local newspapers endure, potential online businesses could develop to collect and edit local, online-newspaper reporting and deliver it to larger audiences, for county and statewide audiences.
Matt D.
Although new technologies are on the rise, newspapers will always be a vital part of our community. It is true that people have forgotten the importance of newspapers. Many industries have gone out of business because most people resort to the Internet to catch up on the media.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Obama that journalism and newspapers play an important role in American society. Journalists opened the public to news and became the core of the media.
People do not go out of their way to read the news anymore. Instead, they can get any story with just a click of the button. However, newspapers cover breaking news stories that sometimes do not make it on the internet right away.
I think that people should have to pay for the news they read online because companies are letting go of many hard-working journalists. In this economic state, many people are losing their jobs and it is very tough to acknowledge that journalists are losing theirs to the internet. When did technology take over?
Although some may disagree with paying to read from the internet, it is no different from paying to read a book. Journalists are like authors; except their stories are real. Hard work goes into each story and if journalists and newspapers are not paid, it is almost as if they covered a story for no reason.
Rachel Yonkunas
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading editor Dave Murray’s article about Obama’s reasoning for the vital role that newspapers play for media today. I have to say that I disagree with him for wanting to keep the print version of newspapers alive. In today’s society children and parents are learning how to get their news through new ways of technology rather than a piece of paper. Our economy is already suffering from debts due to the war and other national problems, and Obama’s fight to save the newspaper as a media source when we already have many other ways to track news does not strike me as a problem that is worth fighting for.
ReplyDeleteIn the article Obama states that, "What I hope is that people start understanding if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that." I agree with Obama’s statement, however many newspapers have already made the switch to posting their newspapers on the internet due to its availability and popularity to the public. If anything these newspaper companies are saving their money instead of wasting it on printing costs. Even though they may not be making as much as they once did, they continue to make a profit off of their news stories by setting up a payment plan for those who choose to access their news articles via internet.
Although it is sad to see the print version of newspapers fade away, it is for the better. Newspapers have been dwindling away for a good couple years now, and it’s time to face the facts and realize that our economy is continuing to grow as a technology based society. Obama who refers to himself as the “big newspaper junkie” needs to get with times and realize that this financial crisis is not worth fighting for.
Kelly Bates
I feel that a bailout for the newspaper industry could be a beneficial decision down the road however I believe there is more to be concerned with than this industry at the moment, especially when there are many other economical alternatives.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama said, "I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding.”
I believe this to be a very true statement in saying that people can be misconceived by much of the content on the internet; however, I think that there should be a lot more forethought before a sum of the countries money goes into this.
There are many reputable news sources available online, as well as physical newspapers available online, and on portable devices. However people need to know what these trustworthy sources are and how to access them as opposed to personal blogs, and opinion based websites.
Many people including the future generations are more used to accessing news online because it has been available to them for most of their lifetime. Traditional print methods are not only is becoming obsolete, but also working against the “go-green” transformation we are trying to promote.
Overall I think that there should be some general concern for those journalists who are losing their jobs over the lack of profit from newspaper companies. We depend on these individuals to deliver to the public about news and important information going on around us.
Journalists need to get paid and in order for that to happen there has to be revenue coming from the news industry. This is a problem that does need to be addressed and perhaps a bailout is necessary to keep these journalists doing their job.
Despite having the ability to access news through a click of the mouse or touch of a screen, the desire for a ol' fashion newspaper isn't completely extinct. But in the economic struggle we face, the supply should only fit the demand and no bailout should be given.
ReplyDeleteThe need for factual, non biased print news will be fulfilled by a select few newspapers. Although this will eliminate many jobs, our countries obsession for instant updates has only increased the need for legitimate writing just in alternative mediums. Like Obama said "If you're getting your newspaper over the internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find business model that supports that." Journalism must make the internet a profitable means to deliver the news.
I do agree with turning the newspaper industry into a nonprofit, granting them with tax breaks. It may be the boost newspapers need to keep printing but still isn't handing over millions of dollars our country simply doesn't have. At the end of the day, everybody has been effected by the economy and what makes newspapers more important than health care or education?
Kayla Dorland
After reading Dave Murray's article on how Obama feels about the newspaper industry, you can see that the government is concerned with a lot of things based on this issue. They are trying to pass a legislation that will help the newspaper industry by providing certain tax breaks - I definitely admire President Obama's efforts to bailout the industry in some way!
ReplyDeleteThe government should try and help the industry come back on it's feet. We should worry about what direction this generation's journalism is going however at the same time I believe there are immediate pressing matters that should be looked at first before trying to help a variety of industries at the same time. Till then the industry can work on better reporting through the internet.
As the economy stays stagnant and doesn't improve, a lot of businesses across the board are facing financial issues and are having to end up filing for bankruptcy or merging with different businesses in the same field. I believe that the newspaper industry is important to the people because they provide real news and stories for the world. I agree with President Obama when he mentions that if our news became all blogging or electronic it will be more opinionated than factual. Real journalism comes from printed stories that have fact, statistics as well a real storyline. As for readers, there are many readers across the world that still like to sit down with their favorite newspaper and read from front to back so if this stops, a big part of our life has been taken away from us. This being said, I do believe that goverment should provide a bailout plan for the newspaper industry.
However, at the same time aren't there other ongoing issues that the government should pay attention to first? For example, bringing back troops - if they have money for the newspaper industry, they certainly have money to bring troops back or in fact take care of other internal financial issues!
By :- Charu Bahl
In a time where Facebook and Tweeting have almost instantly taken over the world of journalism, the print newspaper has seemingly become obsolete and not efficient. But where else can you get such in depth coverage? Such strongly-articulated opinions? In an age where instant gratification and real-time updates reign supreme, a well thought-out piece of reporting still cannot be beat. For once, I agree with President Obama: The newspaper industry is taken for granted, and should always remain in circulation. Especially with our economy in such dire straits, the last we should be doing is considering shutting down one of the oldest and largest industries in the country.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Obama when he says that the newspaper industry is being taken for granted, but I do not think that newpaper bailouts need to be the focus of Presidential speeches at this time.
ReplyDeleteThere are other ways to help out the dwindling newspaper industry. "What I hope is that people start understanding if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that."
Obama is completely right. As long as we can find a way to implement payment plans for reading online articles, as many newspapers already have, the journalism, both independent and professional, field will still thrive.
I do not think that it is a bad thing that there are less and less printed newspapers being consumed. In a time where the focus of so many campaigns is to "Go Green" and use less paper when necessary to conserve the environment, maybe it is about time that we start getting all of our news from online newspapers.
Before he gets all his supporters to jump on a newspaper bailout bandwagon, we need to think about some of the other options we have and of some of the good that could potentially come out of the situation.
Amber Flaim
I can see the need for congress to intervene and bail out the newspaper industry, however, given the current debt situation, they shouldn’t take on the costly task all at once. It’s imperative that the public be able to access news that directly affects them, accurately and on time. I agree with President Obama’s concerns with the trend of news leading in the direction of blogs, away from fact checking, and towards confusion. A reliable source of information is vital to the publics well being. Though the newspaper industry as a whole needs work, the government aid should be spent keeping the trustworthy sources available to its people.
ReplyDeleteArielle Hochman