The topic of today's articles is the Newspaper as not only a news source but as a media source in general. Both articles focus on the declining rate of people purchasing and reading the newspaper, however, each author takes a different, opposing stance. Steven Johnson embraces the change- stating that it is somewhat of a natural progression and that there is simply better technology for reading the news. On the other hand, Paul Starr gives us the argument that this decline in newspaper sales and the use of them in general is really negative. Why? Because there is something to be said about tangible news that people get and read every day. But also because- he argues that with the decline in newspapers, there is also a decline in people reading and hearing about the news. I think, by this, that he means that people will/do care less about reading the news if they have to go online to do so. With people not caring about the news anymore, Starr argues that the government will be more likely to do sketchy things because they simply will not be called out on it. There will be much more corruption in the government if they believe that they are not being covered in the news. He goes further into his argument to talk about the economic struggles that will come with the extinction of the newspaper- including loss of jobs as well as a loss of the profits made from the business. As I read the articles, I was not sure what side I was on. On one hand, I fully agree with Johnson. To be entirely honest, I have never picked up an article simply to read the news for my own interests OR for enjoyment purposes. For that, people of this generation are totally used to going to online sources to read mostly entertainment but probably for news as well. At the same time, though, I couldn't care less about the news or stories that are in the newspaper or online (again, to be entirely honest) especially if it has to do with government and politics. So, I guess that would sort of prove Starr's argument. I do care a heck of a lot less now that the news as well as entertainment are not only available on the same sheet of paper. Therefore, I do not read them. Therefore, the government probably could get away with more sketchy things because I sure as heck am not paying any attention to what they're doing. I guess I would have to have somewhat of a happy medium. I do not think that the newspaper should be done away with and I think that kids and students should be encouraged to read the newspaper on their own as well as in and for school. But I do not think that it is a big enough issue as to where news and things should not be internet and electronic based or anything. Maybe there is another way to fuse the two and have a happy medium while still encouraging the public to read up on news and governmental affairs?
Do you think there is such a happy medium between internet news and entertainment and the newspaper? If so, what is your idea?
Who do you side with in the argument? Why?