Both of the articles assigned spoke of the decreasing amount of newspapers and their subscribers due to new media. Paul Starr's article I found particularly interesting because it went more in depth and discussed multiple topics about this one subject. Starr's article brought up many points about why newspapers are going out of business and why it's a problem. The one that concerns me the most is that since there are multiple ways to get news now, not many people care about the authenticity of the source or the accurateness of the content. Those who post or share these inaccurate articles don't check to make sure that it is legitimate information. With newspapers, a credited reporter writes the stories and there are labeled columns if it is a news or opinion piece. On the Internet, it is easy for someone to pass off an opinion piece as news. Starr brings up the fact that it's also difficult to tell the difference between self-promotion and an actual satisfied review. One of the biggest problems with these situations is the fact that even though people have an endless amount of information on the Internet, they don't bother to check on the facts of an article or check to make sure a piece is legitimate and not satire. This results in many misinformed people, rumors, and false claims. This also results in shallow, less-informed news being absorbed because people don't bother to search for more information.
In addition, by making anyone a potential news-creator with blogs and twitter, individuals are gaining influential power because often times, their news is taken seriously. My discussion question is this: do you think people should delve more into researching a news topic when wanting to share it or do you think a 'news' article should be labeled by the accuracy of the content?