Is it just me or has TheGuardian shrunk in size of late? I noticed that the latest Saturday edition of TheGuardian was slightly thinner than usual, it felt easier to grasp with one hand and after taking the supplements out and opening the main paper it seemed almost anorexic. Today’s paper was thinner than a normal weekday edition (although I don’t know whether Thursday editions tend to be smaller than say Friday’s). I’m not complaining, it is probably better to minimise the size of newspapers to save on the amount of paper produced and disposed of in just a single day. But perhaps it is due to the move from print newspaper readership towards internet news readership; a free and convenient alternative. As revolutionary as internet news is, let’s hope it doesn’t cause the departure of printed news media. For 90p a day, TheGuardian is still well worth the money (and thank God they changed the typeface).
This week Rosa has been flumping about with not a lot to do and getting paranoid about swine flu. Reading: Virginia Woolf A Room of One’s Own (still getting into it). Listening: Vaughan William’s Lark Ascending, Billy Bragg’s The Internationale and William Walton’s Façade (find on Spotify)
Obviously not everyone has access to the internet so I don't think newspapers should disappear completely. However, I think internet news is far superior. Most significantly it's updated constantly, whereas newspapers provide only a snapshot of news. It also allows for reader interaction, which though admittedly is normally an opportunity for right wing nuts to have a rant, means that journalists are more accountable for inaccuracies and invalid arguments (not with news stories, but particularly with comment and editorials). Also the Guardian website today asked readers to help go through the expenses claims, which could never happen with print alone. Finally internet news means there is just so much more available, which is normally a good thing. And to top it off, you can even find out the crossword answers.
ReplyDeleteAlso I have noticed an increase in spelling mistakes both in internet and print news. But maybe I just have had too much time on my hands recently.
ReplyDeleteI think the need for constantly updating ("rolling") news is only there because it exists; I don't think it makes it any better to have constant updates, it's like having 24 hour news channels... if anything important happens there will just be a news bulletin on TV and radio.
There's a lot of stuff on media websites that's just rubbish to fill up space and time (a bit like SEND US YOUR PICTURES OF FREAK WEATHER/BIT OF RAIN).
I think 24 hour news on tv exists for a different reason, presumably so anyone can watch the news at any time. As a result they do sometimes get left repeating constantly, or filling time.
ReplyDeleteHowever saying there's no need for constantly updated news is to suggest that something important happens, or a story makes a development, only every 24 hours. This just isn't true; if you follow the changes a news website will make everyday to its homepage, you see how much one single story can develop very quickly.
Another point comes from this; because it can be updated so much, internet news is limitless and provides much more information. Newspapers are restricted to how much they can fit, so they can't put every single update into their articles.
Also one thing I really like on the Guardian website is the use of hyperlinks, both to external media but also to other Guardian stories to give background to the current article. That's a really good way of holding news stories together. They don't seem to do it on other news websites that I've seen though.
ReplyDelete