The demise of newspapers? In response to The The Daily Show

I think that the newspaper industry is going through both a death and an adaptation. There is no question that the industry is dying, papers are going bankrupt and even shutting down completely in some cases. Even major papers like the Chicago Tribune face questionable fates and the New York Times had to remortgage the building that houses its headquarters. But at the same time, I definitely realize that this death is but a transition to what will most likely become an electronic-only news world. The internet is more convenient than a daily newspaper in many respects and allows for immediate coverage that newspapers have long since been unable to provide. I know that television gave the newspaper industry difficulty long before the internet, but I think the threat of online news sources is far greater than what TV first brought. While television brought competition, the internet threatens a complete replacement. It can do everything that a newspaper can, but faster and more conveniently.

                I’m not really sure what would happen if newspapers were to disappear. I think there would definitely be an information gap for both senior citizens who typically aren’t tech savvy as well as the minority of Americans who don’t have internet access. I don’t think that there would be a terrible difference in overall news coverage since nearly every article that is published in print today is also published online. College students and young people in general have become accustomed to online news sources and get the majority of their news from the internet. As the generation of the internet grows up, I think that the adaptation of internet news sources will eclipse the newspaper industry. The idea of a newspaper has already, in some cases become more of a novelty than a primary source of news. I get a copy of The Daily Tarheel every day to read before class or at breakfast and to keep up with happenings on campus, but I get primarily get it for the sake of differentiation. It’s fun to read something in print, and that’s what I think will keep the newspaper industry afloat for the time being- the physical presence of a newspaper and its sense of tradition.

                As newspapers dry up across the US, I can’t help but wonder how it will affect the credibility and stature of individual journalists. Having something published in print typically draws more attention to the author of a piece and, at least in my opinion, provides a larger sense of credibility than an online article. I think the vastness of the internet and the multitude of media outlets in a way degrades, may it be minutely, the stature of serious journalists. There are so many fictitious and misinformed websites that are just as easily, and often more, available than what are typically validated and credible news sources. I know the names CNN and The New York Times provide a sense of credibility in their own right, but the fact that they are found just as easily as a site like CollegeHumor, seems to diminish their creditability. This concept may not have a major effect upon the online news industry, but it definitely raises questions.

G-Male Video

I’m a little conflicted over the implications of the video. I’m caught in between being worried about Google’s invasiveness and the helpfulness of their advertisements and customization abilities.  There is definitely a scary quality to how easily they are able to monitor your online activity and emails and it raises the question of where to draw the line- if there is a line at all.  At the moment, in my opinion Google’s surveillance and involvement is pretty benign, but I can definitely see how it could get out of hand of dangerous. I think it’s extremely risky for one company to have such detailed history and information about millions of people. But while I see these risks, I feel like for now, the advertisements and suggestions are helpful and nonthreatening. I definitely see Google differently after watching the video. I think the video’s personification gave Google a more relevant representation of the company’s actions than what most people envision. Seeing Google as a person made it so much more real and invasive. I think because there isn’t normally a face or body to visualize Google, we become detached from their actions and don’t fully weigh their implications. I knew that people are often concerned about Google’s involvement in their customers’ online activity, but I didn’t know how extensive it was. In regards to how I would react if a less reputable company utilized similar tactics, I feel like I would most likely respond differently. I would probably be more bothered by the invasiveness because they would have less of a reputation to uphold if controversy or extreme infringements were to arise.