I agree with Stephen's speech that there will be a future for newspapers, just like radio did not die out after television came into existence, therefore taking over radio's "reason for existence." Like radio, I think Stephen is right to say that newspapers will evolve into something else, so it won't disappear like the rumors just because of the internet. I also agree that with this increase of news and "noise" as Stephen calls it, it makes it harder to find good news. Can I really trust what I am reading? And because many of us do not have the time or rather may not know how to authenticate articles we read online, this is a big issue. Will this affect mainstream population at all? And if so, how?
He also mentions that the growing population of online newsreaders is growing at a rate much larger than the diminishing paper newsreaders. Most online counterparts of well-known, paid paper newspapers are currently free, but will this increasing online audience/readers eventually cause online news to somehow become a sort of paid subscription? As I mentioned above, Stephen mentions that along with the increased volume of readily available news there is a large percentage of faulty or false news. So he believes that newspapers will remain the main source of "authentic" news. This certainly foreshadows a possibility of some sort of online subscription newspaper to me. Seeing that most of us no longer pay for news, IF this does happen sometime in the future, would you be willing to pay for news?