On Friday, I read a blog post by Joe Mandese from Media Post News titled, "Americans Say News Still Fit For Print, Distrust Blogs" and questioned some of the correlations.
First, we all know that the traditional newspaper industry and model is in very deep trouble. Denver's Rocky Mountain News is printed its last paper February 27, 2009, the New York Sun closed last fall, and the rumors that the San Francisco Chronicle and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer are close to death without major concessions or new buyers/financing. According to Media Daily News, a number of newspapers have been on the
auction block for months, with no buyers coming forward. McClatchy has
been trying without success to find a buyer for the Miami Herald. The San Diego Union Tribune and the Austin American-Statesman find themselves in a similar predicament. Then in my hometown of Detroit, the Detroit Media Partnership (Detroit Free Press and The Detroit News) announced last fall a major shift in how they will do business by cutting print editions in favor of digital media, putting more resources in support of their digital efforts. Over the years newspapers have continued to experience a long decline in circulation and beginning in 2007 that decline accelerated.
Second, the decline in circulation and readership for a traditional newspaper means people must be getting their news differently.
Third, just about any survey taken in the last two years points to the consumption of news strongly in the online world and becoming stronger.
With my three point outline, here's the rub for me and why I'm questioning the correlations made in the blog post mentioned. All the data suggests that traditional print newspapers are becoming less relevant, not more relevant.
Yet, a survey conducted by Rosen Group Public Relations is cited wherein a national poll indicates a vast majorty of U.S. consumers still deem print editions of newspapers and magazines as being "indispensible" (which to me indicates better than great relevancy) sources of news and entertainment. But then out of the other side of the mouth, this same national poll found two-thirds of Americans consider web sites "devoted to news" to be the #1 source of news and information.
In addition, Lori Rosen, founder of the Rosen Group, is cited as making the statement that nearly 60% of respondents do not consider information found on blogs to be "credible." The first problem I have with this statement is the leap that news oriented websites are the same thing as blogs. In many cases they are not one in the same. The more appropriate question to answer is how credible is digital news sources versus traditional print newspapers. To me, that is a fair comparison, not a statement about blogs. There is often a great distinction between news oriented websites and blogs, but it seems that Ms. Rosen has blurred the lines of fact by trying to support her argument that traditional print newspapers are indispensable and with a leap more credible.
An interesting twist to this argument is that Floyd Norris, the chief financial correspondent of The New York Times and The International Herald Tribune, wrote a blog, dated January 31, 2009, stating "Things are so bad for newspapers that, when asked if they saw
information from various sources as credible, just 34 percent of
Americans said they viewed articles in newspapers as very or extremely
credible. That is behind TV news (36 percent), radio news (38 percent)
and conversations with friends (40 percent)."
Also an Interactive Survey organized and produced by iFOCOS, a Reston,
Va.-based media think tank presented the following findings:
- The survey finds the Internet not only outweighs television, radio,
and newspapers as the most frequently used and important source for
news and information, but Web sites were also cited as more trustworthy
than more traditional media sources – nearly a third (32%) said
Internet sites are their most trusted source for news and information,
followed by newspapers (22%), television (21%) and radio (15%).
- Although the vast majority of Americans are dissatisfied with the
quality of journalism (64%), overall satisfaction with journalism has
increased to 35% in this survey from 27% who said the same in 2007.
- Both traditional and new media are viewed as important for
the future of journalism – 87% believe professional journalism has a
vital role to play in journalism’s future, although citizen journalism
(77%) and blogging (59%) are also seen as significant by most
Americans.
- Very few Americans (1%) consider blogs their most trusted source of news, or their primary source of news (1%). (Note: this supports Ms. Rosen's earlier statement, but only in its proper context of the blogosphere versus news oriented sites such as CNN.com)
- Three in four (75%) believe the Internet has had a positive impact on the overall quality of journalism.
- 69% believe media companies are becoming too large and powerful to
allow for competition, while 17% believe they are the right size to
adequately compete.
Finally, the national poll survey conducted by the Rosen Group is very hard to find. It can't be found on their website even though it is their survey (interesting!). I happened to find it a link to the survey on BullDog Reporter's Daily Dog blog commenting on the survey results. The national survey by the Rosen Group is in actuality (if you believe BullDog Reporter's link) a Survey Monkey Survey with 11 questions. As many of you know, Survey Monkey gives anyone the ability to create online surveys quickly, easily and in many cases free. My concern now is with the methodology and validity of this so-called national poll.
Ok, so what's my point in all of this ... I don't like proof-texting. I'm borrowing terminology often found in scholarly circles when it comes to interpretation of Bible scriptures. Basically proof-texting is producing apparent support for a
position without adequate regard for the contexts of the
individual texts which may indicate differences and nuances.
In my opinion, the Rosen Group survey supports an already-held conviction that smacks of being self-serving. Believe me, I want to support and defend my clients (and I admire Rosen's attempt) but at the same time I want to do it "credibly." That's my thought ... what's yours?
P.S. BTW, I really do love my traditional print newspaper, I read it religiously every day ... or I will until the the Detroit Media Partnership changes come into effect ... and I must say I'll miss my ink fingers.
Recent Comments