Comments on: The End of Reporters’ Attention Monopoly

By: anns

anns — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 01:58:49 +0000

Unfortunately, amateurs can do the journalists’ jobs as well as they are being done NOW — because staffing cuts at major papers mean that most “reporters” are now relying primarily on clipping services which are largely filled with PR releases.

That papers can be replaced by amateurs is not an indication that there never should have been professional journalists, but that the extinction of that breed is even closer than it seems.

By: BP Beckley

BP Beckley — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:47:57 +0000

Well, it looks like you’re going to get your wish, so I hope you’re right. I hope that it really is true that people caring about what they’re interested in is exactly the same as people caring about what’s important.

Also, this article is itself a manifestation of an elaborate self-justifying ideology, is it not?

By: Kolohe

Kolohe — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:09:50 +0000

Excellent post.

By: Akusu

Akusu — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:21:23 +0000

I’d just like to say that as a young person, I’ve never been enamoured with the newspaper format. By the time I was interested in news in general, I was already disgusted in the pathetic efforts on my local news channel and discovered that newspapers tended to be large and unwieldy to hold.

I am thus part of a generation that has never been limited in interests in anything other than an all-or-nothing fashion. Either I’m interested, or I’m not. I’d rather follow things that cater to my interests (such as this seemingly under-appreciated blog) than pay for a rarely useful newspaper.

Of course, many people live their lives completely oblivious of the happenings of the world, which can be fine but equally can be risky.