Should it be newspapers vs the blogs?

us-vs-themRoy Greenslade makes an interesting comment in his blog on the Guardian.

Greenslade argues that journalism will only survive if pro journalists and citizen bloggers join together.

The newspapers-versus-bloggers argument is entirely false. It is not only not a case of us (good) versus them (bad), it is like comparing apples with pears.

Greenslade is reacting to a Huffington Post column by Johann Hari stating newspapers are the year’s most underrated phenomenon. Hari writes

Here’s a weird paradox. If you include the Internet, more people are reading quality newspapers than ever before. Yet newspapers are – as the bankruptcy of the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune shows – dying. We don’t just want it all, we want it free. Does it matter? As good as some bloggers are, they don’t have the army of foreign correspondents or in-depth investigative teams that are necessary to make sense of the world. If print newspapers – for all their manifest flaws and corporate biases – die, there will be an aching hole where newsgathering used to be. Newspapers: buy them or lose them.

Ultimately, I agree and disagree with Greenslade. I do think if newspapers completely die out, newsgathering won’t be what it once was. There does need to be participation between bloggers and journalists, but better yet, maybe journalists should just be bloggers. Then bloggers will have all the skills of a professional journalism minus the cost of printing a paper.

I don’t think citizen journalism is the future. That could lead to very inaccurate, biased news. There are, of course, places and times when that type of journalism is good. But overall, I think the world needs journalists. We just have to find a way to use print journalists in this wi-fi world of ours.

Image from


1 Comment

Filed under From the blogosphere

One response to “Should it be newspapers vs the blogs?

  1. I actually just read an excellent article in the New Yorker about how consumers have the best of both worlds right now.
    Due to this awkward “in between” phase of journalism (while journalists all try to figure out how to reinvent newspapers) consumers are getting quality stories they can either buy or get for free.
    But I’ve pointed out in my blog and so has the New Yorker that in the end we will all pay.
    This idea of free news will not continue forever and eventually consumers will no longer get their news free or there will be so little journalists that they will actively pay for them to come back.
    Either way, we cannot follow down this road for much longer without facing severe consequences. You can check out my blog at
    Your blog is very interesting and I would like to add it to my blogroll.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s