Print is not dead. How can it be? The human mind isn’t programmed to understand every concept in audio, video and flash form only. Media that adds entertaining value to print is great, and to fit today’s online standards, necessary. But print, being paper or text on the Internet is the foundation for all other media’s to build upon. The online world is transforming the way we think we need our news presented to us, when in actuality nothing is clearer and more to the point than black ink on white paper. Some may disagree. It’s possible years from now paper will be seen as the more unique form of news consumption, like bell bottoms, ripped jeans and blues brother sun glasses that have all reappeared as fashion statements.
Every person has turned to the Internet as their main resource. Statistically, behavior changes over time, therefore paper’s back burner residence will change. As people look around themselves, see a bunch of black- or whatever colored- plastic only to visually stumble upon the person in the corner, who’s folding up the paper on their way out the door. It looked so easy, light and portable. You’ll look down at the screen on which 100 different windows are open and become immediately overwhelmed in what will become an all-inclusive inconvenience, at times. Obviously the Internet makes everyone’s life more convenient but not in the same way paper does. So paper can’t die because it serves alternate purposes the Internet just cannot. Web crazies threaten papers demise in their blogs and sorts, saying all consumers can find their place on the Web, but in reality they’ve been consumed themselves by the Internet and lost sight of how we got there in the first place.
Tim Berners-Lee said machines will soon rise to levels of permanence and intuitivism; knowledge will be out of our hands and stored all in one place. Currently, though seemingly different, the Internet is a young baby, shallow and scattered. Refining this tool to excellence will only stack more dependence upon our shoulders, or brains shall I say. What will happen to the value of learning and retaining knowledge when a computer can think and store for you?
“These computers are supposed to be there for us, not the other way around,” Berners-Lee said. At what point will we recognize and hold the importance of human beings cognitive abilities above that of a machine? Ancestral story telling seems almost ridiculous nowadays. Your computer tells the story that makes you cry/laugh. A computer cannot interpret what you want/ feel, and it cannot inflict pain or pleasures, yet. Imagine a world where eyes look directly at the electronic screen for all solutions; there is no conversation because there is nothing to talk about and eye contact, the mere thought of gazing into another fleshy soul could become a life changing experience.
So the question becomes, who’s enslaving who? While computers are doing all of the thinking, configuring and hard work, humans are sitting back relishing in a simple semi-satisfactory situation called loneliness. The point when which we give our minds to the machines will be both the end of personal intimacy but the start of extensive personalization.
The thought of spending my fading time learning to dissect and reassemble codes in hyper text mark-up language doesn’t exactly throw me into jubilation. Although it’s understood that the language of the Web is useful for career rearing purposes. The tiny tags that symbolically collide, if done effectively, can create a friendly interface that is functional, informational and easy to navigate.
Let us pretend that a major company is relying on you to redesign their homepage so that it embodies their flavorful purpose, if you will. You are probably going to make stacks of the mean green, ($); also it’s enjoyable to know that the curve could be chasing you. Web designing is the new tan skin, good clothes and socialite personality; http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2008-02-19/jacobs-geekchic. Hold the ability to manifest a person’s favorite domain in the palm of your hands and be reminded of the small intricate steps that led you there.
For all of those who are obsessed, and to myself, don’t forget that your web ‘skin’ is not your real skin. http://thedarkestevil.com/internet-life/apple/519-i-am-not-obsessed-i-am-an-apple-evangelist/
By the time I read a chapter in a text book, I could have read ten chapters online. Sure the first sentence of every paragraph are the only ones upholding a purpose in life, but who really cares? That’s why mojo’s (mobile journalists who post directly online with self-editing process), are writing for that type of eye, the type that searches for what they want to see and nothing else. Scanning over hundreds of words doesn’t quite exercise the mind; can it be that Google is making us stupid?
Books allow you to transcend synchronous space and float through world’s intangible to the hands; such a far fetch from scanning, scrolling and paging through interfaces until you’ve reached the very end at which point you couldn’t regurgitate the content even if you tried. It is my understanding that people who read print, whether it be fiction or news, those people actually enjoy the slower momentum that enables the mind to open up, letting the words absorb instead of bounce off annoyingly.
There is always the other side of an argument. Reading on the web could enlighten you and/or connect you to some information that you might not have otherwise been exposed to. There are many media types on the Web; it is almost impossible to engulf yourself in the text alone, therefore the Web remains a place for focused searches and an information speedway, (which is faster than a highway), for those of us who know what we want and when we want it. Readers, stick with the books. Here’s some outside opinions on the topic.
It is time for the innovative minds that pirated print in the beginning of news dispersion to combat the magnetic magnificence of the Web; big print venues like, The Chronicle and The New York Times want to survive this technical time of electronic interaction, instantaneous information and individual control over one’s wants and needs, but how can they compete with a lovable monster? http://http://www.123helpme.com/preview.asp?id=71815
Blogger’s know how to keep the story/conversation going. Information is just the start; these individuals know how to speculate facts and bring more to the table than what has been served. Traditional media has remained strictly factual, and a bit dry, if compared to the juicy opinions of blogger’s. Reading print is like saying, I only care about the concrete facts, and the main thread that runs through the story; newspapers should incorporate more opinion in its content. The article itself might not be the place for opinion, however, under the byline, or on a separate page designated for author opinion, the writers themselves could contribute, (with all ‘off record’ sources in mind), a personal view of the topic. After all, the Web is all about personalization. Just a piece of the author’s personality/opinion would exhibit the expertise of a writer’s ability to withhold his/her bias’, and possibly entice the reader to look for specific writer’s columns, which facilitates the idea of personalization.
This is not only a physical change in the way news is consumed by the public. The social aspect of the Web encompasses today’s public with a sense of control and in-depth perception of the world around them. Newspapers control what the reader wants, whereas the Web allows the reader to control it. Newspaper could tap into this idea easily. People want their opinions to be heard and to count, so papers should allot some real estate on its pages for websites that people can visit for commenting, and could later be published in the next issue.
The bottom line is that papers need to keep a transparent feel to them. Transparency permits the reader to feel like they know what is going on and keeps a sense of personality on the pages. Giving the reader a chance to participate in some way will ultimately be the deciding factor whether print will remain a main source for news consumers. http://http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/papers/arata.html
Today’s historical record is being and will be shaped by the increasing prevalence of web journalism and the vast array of technological devices tied into the internet. Replacing the printed word more and more every day, web journalism feeds off the simple efforts of average citizens with camera phones in ways that journalists and historians of the past could hardly dream. Every journalist wants the information for their story to come from as close a source to the story as possible. In light of the creation of the internet and technological advancements in communications media, almost any bystander can be an instant primary source of information for the web journalist. This trend towards greater speed and accuracy in the recording and distribution of news will also reshape the way history is recorded. Imagine if historians didn’t have to rely on the epic poetry of Homer but could simply click on a web link to Odysseus’s video phone to see and hear, first hand, what he saw as he blinded the Cyclops. The historical record that web journalism can be predicted to create will be one of far less ambiguity. While “spin” may never be completely removed from news of the historical record in the future the old axiom that “history is written by the victors” my no longer ring true. With enough independent primary sources, granted by the boom of technological advancement, history may have the voice to represent itself. Keep your eyes wide.