Question of the Day | 12/15/2008 11:00 pm
Times are changing! Internet-only journalism will now be considered for the Pulitzer Prize. What does this mean for journalism?

© Shutterstock
49 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
The apartment bldg. I live in has over 30 apts and, in the morning, I see only one newspaper delivered. Times they are a changing. However, curling up with a computer isn’t the same as curling up with a good book. It is what I use to tire me out for sleep time.
We can talk about it forever, we can long for the days not so long ago when an important portion of our lives each day was to immerse - really immerse ourselves in the newspapers (my favorite the New York Times - sorry, Liz Smith!) and enjoy our favorite publications while sitting sideways on the sofa or, light behind, slouching in our favorite lounge chair.
The last year, particularly the last months, have been the death knell for the written word. The copy still out is leaner, and fewer books are published and the bookstores are hurting. I have thought long and hard on how to fight back as I write often and in a number of media — but the writing is - no, “not on the wall” - but on the screen. The Internet has devoured our lives and our former worlds. In the process, our lifestyles have changed and the hours of leisure normallly spent with the written word, are now mostly spent staring at a screen.
Protests are useless, as our world is changing, revolving faster than we have ever seen it … and like it or not, ladies, we are moving on with it.
As the kids say, “change happens”. We - the “more mature” who knew life back then - feel a sense of sadness for what was. How could we not?
But if — as it surely looks - that our reading is going to be done on the screen, then it follows that Pulitzers will be given for best writing, best reporting, the whole works, by online writers. While it is hard for us to imagine that the quality could ever be as great as the best written on paper that was in our hands, let’s hope that the most talented make the transition
more pleasant.
What do I see as the problems. Let me have a page. But, for now, two come to mind. Frankly, I don’t feel comfortable sitting on a desk chair reading for hours, do you? I feel I am putting permanent wrinkles - God forbid - in my rear end already. I am afraid to look in the mirror (but then I am afraid to look in the mirror anyhow!!)
But second, this is a fast moving generation. No one has time to read lengthy novels of real value, or articles that don’t put the highlights of news in capsule form so we can move on to our cell phones, our Wiis, our obligations that demand our time. WHAT???? And they call this - if we take away the recession/depression/ the scandals - the world of the future?
Do the electronic world gains even touch the more peaceful, pleasant world where things that were the gigantic pieces of what we - who have been around awhile - called “the quality of life”? I don’t think so.
I don’t know about you, but I am going to miss that world that was. More than a little.
Dear Joan…the New York Times happens to be my favorite read, too. I think it is the most important newspaper extant and I hope it never disappears. But I also read every day The New York Post, the New York Daily News, USA Today, Variety, the London Telegraph, The W„ashington Post and am also reading on the Internet and watching TV. Going totally nuts. Merry Christmas. Liz Smith
Liz I’m with you on newspapers, I read 7: NY Post, NY Times, NY Daily News, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Financial Times, Law Journal and Asbury Park Press. I read different newspapers for different reporters, sections and other reasons. I enjoy the actual newspapers so that I can get my fingers dirty. I like looking at the whole page at once, advertisements and all; you can’t do this on the internet. We are lucky to be in the New York Metro area, we still have so many newspapers. But alas, I feel that we are becoming the minority in terms of reading paper and papers. I remember my grandfather coming home with the Herald Tribune, The Mirror, The World Telegram and Sun and sometimes the Journal American, all now gone from the scene. I was always fascinated with gossip: Ed Sullivan, Leonard Lyons, Earl Wilson, Walter Winchell, Hy Gardner, Hedda Hopper and Louella Parsons. This is back when children would read, even if it was gossip and sports, it was reading.
Dear Joan - Being of a “certain” age - I grew up with books by the gross (started reading at age 4) and have never and will never stop - no matter what comes along!!! Still read newspapers, two a day to be exact (can’t keep up with Ms Liz!!) a couple books a week and many magazines - plus the backs of cereal boxes if nothing else is available. Nothing - and I mean NOTHING will ever take the place of reading in my life - or my children’s for that matter! Their homes are littered with books everywhere - including the infamous “reading room” and I’m thrilled that I was the one who instilled that joy in them when they were very little.
I confess I enjoy my web browsing and my wowOwow and The Daily Beast and all other forms of information, communication with friends and even playing games now and then! But nothing - nothing - will ever take the place of a good book - be it novel, historical, political, biographical or humor! So for now - and as long as the eyes hold out (then I guess audio-books will take over) the written word remains my best friend. I’m NEVER alone!!
To Sharon, Liz Smith, and all the others writing today who feel as strongly as I do about actually going to my favorite hideaway, picking up the newspapers - especially New York Times for its many fascinating sections and, of course, the staff that is obviously comprised of the best of the best writers whose ability with words makes me envious.
Each of you know that we have “our place” that we like to cozy up in to read. Tell me that I am not the only one who loves the feel of turning the page, the quality of paper itself, and especially the type of print used in books. It is that “something” we can’t put our fingers on that draws us and - as we read - brings us into that other world that brings us so much pleasure - and yes, at times, new knowledge.
Our own private world, our own “escape”, and for many of us our greatest pleasure is reading.
I don’t stop at books. OK, neither do you. Certain - and I said “certain” - magazines pull me in with the clever use of graphics, color, and words so descriptive that I feel as if I were in that space, that time. I am probably the only one in our country who finds that the British travel magazine WANDERLUST beats out the rest. (It doesn’t hurt that now and again it has taken what I have written - but that isn’t it!)
Well, I could do a column here — and maybe there should be - on favorite magazines and why.
Will we all get used to reading books and newspapers on the internet, sitting in our desk chairs? Doesn’t it already distract you to be reading something that runs a few pages and have that distracting announcement “You’ve got mail” that jars you out of your mode — and then it is up for grabs whether you will take a peek - or keep seeing that full mailbox and keep reading A BOOK!!
Face it — our choices are made for us - and what is to be is. We are told not to look back but to look forward — but, I am sorry, but in this case — look forward to WHAT? Don’t they know we have an addiction to REAL paper and turning pages at our leisure???
And life - as we know it - moves forward … and so must we. But couldn’t resist a bit of nostalgia!!!
Joan, as a small publisher I surely understand your feeling about holding a book in your hand and turning the pages. Many, many people feel this way, not only us ‘old folks’ but younger folks who have just discovered books. There will NEVER be anything to replace our feelings about reading a book or a magazine, but there must be a way for publishers on the internet to solve this problem and keep all people reading hard copy.
Maybe the answer is in instant publishing - paid upon request and quick bound and sent to the new owner’s mailbox. This does obviate the finely bound book that I so admire (and try to emulate with my books). I’m sure there will always be collectors who really appreciate the feel of handmade paper and leather as I always will.
Patrice
Patrice … it is so wonderful that you too understand - and certainly you would with your wonderful life is all about books - but, in reality, there are millions of us - I know it. Your idea is a good one - a great one. . a hopeful one. As for me, for my lifetime I have been involved heavily in libraries. I am guessing that the other lifesaver for those who like the book, the handmade paper in our hands, I believe that for some long time to come - our lifetimes at least - we will have the backup of a world of books within their doors. In my Midwest area, library use has never been higher, and their offerings have widened and changed with the times - as we have to. But with their outreach - for instance - I was able to get 12 books this week that was issued in the 1950s-60s — and it was like Christmas. I watch women with their children at check-out in lines long, and piles and piles of kids’ books — and each time, every time, I say that there is hope. Perhaps the new will be on Internet after a while - or your choice - but the millions of choices hopefully already in place will be our saving grace.
I review books - read about 300 a year - so you know that this is something important to me — and I feel that we two are on the same wavelength and depth of feeling. I hope your field prospers — as what a wonderful place to work!

The motto of The New York Times is, I believe, “all the news that is fit to print”. Unfortunately, The New York Times is no longer the newspaper it once was. Most newspapers are not. Why? One reason is that by only have morning papers, the news is already old by the time the paper is delivered. Another reason could be that most newspapers have lost their ability to be non-partisan…on the front page.
I enjoy reading our little weekly paper that has stories about the community and our city council meetings. It still has a police blotter that is often amusing. A neighbor child’s picture might be found inside about a school project that is being built. The cosmopolitan papers have become dull. The comic sections have been reduced to only the fashionable comic strips and the local news is hard to find.
The Pulitzer will continue to be awarded to reporters who write for largest newspapers…..and now to their Internet Sites. It is inevitable but just like the newspapers being published today are not as newsworthy as they once were, I also do not think the Pulitzer is as grand as it used to be either.
Newspapers, at least in print form (not the Internet versions), get scooped constantly because the Internet and cable-TV are so much quicker at providing information. I wouldn’t say that the bias of newspapers has necessarily hurt their readership that much. TV news outlets are much more openly biased. To wit: FOX (Republican), CNN (moderate-to-Democrat), CBS (moderate-to-Democrat), NBC (moderate-to-Republican), MSNBC (Democrat).
Radio news - the field I’m in - died about 15 years ago, at least on the local level. It used to be that a small majority of stations had at least a one-person news department back in the day. But the FCC deregulated in 1993, saying that it was no longer a national-security interest, etc., to carry local news on radio, per the Communications Act of 1934’s dictum that stations should educate and inform listeners. So, stations started lopping off their news departments left and right. Now, there are a handful of seasoned radio reporters out there and a lot of kids fresh out of college willing to make $8 part-time or whatever - and no middle ground of mid-level reporters, like in the past. I suppose it’s all supply and demand, not the end of the world.

In college, one of my part-time jobs was as a cub reporter for the local daily paper. The City Editor was a dynamo about keeping editorial comments out of news stories. That sort of discretion is lacking in many dailies today. The daily papers once had what they called the “women’s page” where stories relating to engagements, charities and social clubs could be found. They, too, are mostly gone. Yes, the newspapers are often scooped by the “instant media” but that does not mean that tomorrow morning’s newspaper should include those stories that we heard on the evening news tonight. They “put the paper to bed” earlier and earlier. Sunday newspapers are now out on the streets on Saturday. I agree that people’s reading habits have changed but the newspaper, as it once was, is no more.
I regret the loss of radio news. I also regret the loss of music and disc jockeys. Radio is now talk …talk and more talk. But, as you say, not the end of the world. We just adjust our habits to correlate with the times in which we live.
You reported on the Cubs?! Ha.
What radio has lost is its grand nature. Some would say that’s because of TV, the Internet, etc. But a lot of it is simply a lack of understanding on the part of corporate bean counters that radio is a medium that is geared to the ear. Personally, I don’t think someone should even be on radio, unless they have a solid voice and delivery. I was blessed with a clear, booming voice, but it took years to develop my style. About 95% of that is just sounding like yourself, instead of trying to sound like someone else.
The Pulitzer considering Internet journalism makes perfect sense to me. But I will continue to get the local paper, no matter how thin it gets. It’s hard to enjoy a bowl of cereal in front of the computer! And I look at ads for local retailers; read the police report; read about city council, school board and downtown development activities, etc. Those kinds of stories either aren’t yet on the Internet cites, or they’re too hard to find. I’m basically lazy and like to be spoon fed!

3 Comments






























