“Journalism, I would argue, provides the lubricant that keeps the wheels of democracy spinning. It is the ultimate check in our system of checks and balances. It evens the contest between the haves and the have-nots. Even with its countless flaws, its frequent excesses, its sometimes mindless pursuit of the trivial, journalism ensure balance in society's balance of power.”
Today, The Cleveland Plain Dealer published a farewell column from longtime editor Doug Clifton (the quote above came from the column).
In the column, Clifton wrote:
I hear this at least once a day: "I don't need the newspaper; I get my news from the Internet." Of course, that's not true. People who prefer the Internet do get their news from the newspaper. The Internet doesn't produce the content, it merely distributes it. If you go to Google News or Yahoo News you will find news, but it will have been provided by AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, The Plain Dealer and countless other newspapers.
I’d like to tweak that last sentence to “… but it will have been provided by journalists at AP, Reuters … and countless other newspapers.”
Anyway, Clifton wrote later in the column, “Newspapers will survive if readers pay them for their Web content or if advertisers flock to newspaper Web sites in sufficient numbers to offset the revenue lost to the ink-on-paper enterprise. One or both of those options is likely to happen.”
In response to Clifton’s column, Howard Owens wrote, “Please, let’s stop talking about how to bilk our readers and concentrate on building web sites they’ll want to make a habit.”
Clifton’s statement comes on the heels of an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal from Arkansas
Democrat-Gazette Publisher Walter E. Hussman. Hussman wrote, in part, that “free” news online is one of the self-inflicted problems of the newspaper industry. That op-ed, in turn, sparked quite the debate on the Digital Media Federation e-forum. We’ll chronicle that conversation on The Digital Edge Web site later this week or early next.
Regardless of whether you agree with Clifton, Hussman, both or neither, the pieces are worth reading and thinking about. Sometimes the best critical thinking comes from understanding an opposing view.