What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
73 Comments
- EustaceTilley, on 01/25/2008, -4/+26Blogs are great and all for up to the minute facts and tid-bits, but a publication like The New Yorker or The Economist is providing readers with objective and well thought out stories. Certainly print media is no longer at the forefront of breaking news, but it hasn't been since the 24-hour news cycle began with the creation of CNN. TV didn't kill all print media and bloggers especially won't (also look at how often blogs, TV and Newspapers that are owned by the same company or that share writing staff will sit on stories until they can publish it simultaneously).
Plus, whens that last time you read a blog that was written as well or by someone with the same credentials as the Wall Street Journal? I never have. - CTK14A, on 01/25/2008, -3/+17Print media has other issues as well, including
1) The irrelevance of the comics/crossword/coupons/sports scores/entertainment section in the digital entertainment age
2) Changing demographics of the readers themselves
3) The irrelevance of the employment/auto pages as advertisement between company and employee or company and customer after Monster, Craigslist and other free online sources were created
4) The creation of new outlets for political messaging (campaign season is one of the most profitable for newspapers)
...among others. - mataranka, on 01/25/2008, -1/+13so long as people have to catch a train or bus to work they'll always be print media.
- philspace, on 01/25/2008, -7/+15Amen. If someone posts a link to, let's say the Washington Post, or any other site that requires a logon or authentication to view the content, I just walk away and never go back.
- moosepile, on 01/25/2008, -1/+9Print media is certainly entering a new phase, but the deathknell hasn't sounded yet, and this is an old topic.
The "print" side of it, ie putting their wares onto a physical medium, is changing, but it doesn't affect the core of what print media is.
Don't forget that "print media" is words, images, etc put onto a paper medium - but the medium is merely the vehicle. It's the print media that is moving to the "display media", but nothing else is changing. The words and images that print media produces come via another medium now, but it's the same.
You can't call print media dead or dying because people don't want to read on paper anymore - the content doesn't need paper as a medium to be relevant. The content has another medium now in electronics, and it can carry on as strong as ever. Compare that to radio.
One could argue that print media is the winner in the electronic age, compared to TV and radio.
Saying that bloggers are winning the media war is akin to saying that having a local cable access channel is winning the war on NBC/ABC/etc. Everything has it's place, and the world isn't ready for bloggers to be the news source. Print media IS electronic media already in that their content is so easily moved from paper to screen.
I'm not saying all (or most, really) print media is doing it right, but they certainly have it easy compared to other media. - whatthefu, on 01/25/2008, -2/+7The thing about newspapers is that they consistently provide quality stories every single day, but most of the time people seem to prefer blogs that summarize these stories and then link to them at the end.
- Roryking, on 01/25/2008, -2/+7I'm pretty sure they're run an article like this at least once a month, for the past 10 years now.
- Gumby_Mac, on 01/25/2008, -0/+4I work for a newspaper and I don't think it will really ever just "disappear". True, some of it's business models are antiquated in view of Craigslist and Monster.com (and any other employment/head hunter website). I'm still amazed that it can cost me $10-15 to place a small classified ad in the paper for 2 days, when I can post a free ad on Craigslist and usually have someone come get whatever crap I'm unloading... and I don't have to screen buyers with my cell phone.
Newspapers make the bulk of their revenue from advertising because it still works. Do you think a little Mom & Pop store is going to get a return on a banner ad on some obscure site, where they might 10-15 click-thrus a month? Anyone who's spent any time online has probably trained their eyes to skip right over and around ad banners, I know I do (hello Adblock). A newspaper ad is still the most effective (albeit expensive) way to reach tens of thousands of potential customers in your immediate area. More of these advertisers should have websites and list their URL's though.
As far as bloggers, we actually started using "citizen journalists" to help with local news. But I have to agree, you'll never get the same quality or level of professionalism from a blogger. Plus, they're not held to the same accountability as a larger (wealthier) corporate entity is. Some crackpot blogger slanders your company on Wordpress, meh, no biggie. A newspaper libels some innocent business man, major lawsuit.
You can read a newspaper at breakfast, spill coffee on it, fold it up and toss it into the car, and when you're done, recycle it. Where else can you get that kind of value for 50¢? Finally, I'm not taking my laptop into the crapper and pray that I can get a WiFi signal so I can read CNN.com or check on my fantasy football league. - tchynerd, on 01/25/2008, -1/+4Until they can get a good enough ebook reader for travel and such I'll stick with my $8 paperback books :)
- Coffeedemon, on 01/25/2008, -0/+3We'll have a paperless world the day we have a paperless bathroom.
- manicallday, on 01/25/2008, -0/+3This is what I would do. I would make the original blogger sign with a special free account that would allow its readers to view the content without signing in. Then keep track of the amount of hits the blogger accumulates on my site. The bloggers with the most hits I would actually pay and give them special privileges and content to the main news site. For instance, I may offer bloggers extra alerts, or staff assistance with their blog content. In return, I would want ask for space to run advertisements, from my sponsors, on the bloggers site.
This way I'm creating more ad space for myself at almost no cost. Further, even if there's a competitor's content on the bloggers site, I'm still benefiting from it. The worst of this plan is that you have to monitor the bloggers site to ensure that the content is appropriate for the sponsors. But the sponsors, that desire the blog upgrade, will know in advance of the potential risk of the content that maybe spread on the site. - nstong, on 01/25/2008, -1/+4Hahaha, I think you all think have heads that are a little inflated. Anyone remember that story that made to the front page right before the iowa cacus, all about how Ron Paul was leading on the internet and clearly traditional media was broken, and everyone would realize how bad they are. How'd that work out for you guys?
- spiffytech, on 01/25/2008, -0/+3Hey, now! The only reason I read the newspaper is for the comics section!
- geekchic, on 01/25/2008, -1/+3That in itself explains and justifies the actions of the serious news publications.
Why spend quite a bit of time and money writing a story, only for it to be ripped off by a blog who justify their actions with nothing more than a weblink? Much better to protect your content behind a subscription firewall and only make it available to people who are willing to pay.
Those who prefer a tabloid bitesize chunk would never subscribe to a serious news publication anyway, so you are not actually losing any revenue.
A publication I used to work for got a lot of inbound links from blogs and we would have to ask them to stop ripping our content as they were often going way past the acceptable journalistic norms of quoting and citing a source. They would reply talking about google links, traffic etc - but the value of the links was negligable at best - and as they had taken most of the content, people rarely clicked on the links to read the article.
Blogs are killing the serious media - but they also need those same news publications for their sources. The parasite is killing the host. - utcursch, on 01/25/2008, -3/+5> Plus, whens that last time you read a blog that was written as well or by someone with the same credentials as the Wall Street Journal? I never have.
http://blogs.wsj.com
Almost all of the 'print' media houses have established their online presence with blogs. To name a few:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/
http://blogs.smh.com.au/
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/topnews/blog-index.html - reed311, on 01/25/2008, -1/+3I hope it will be a long time before print media dies. The amount of propaganda and sensationalist ***** that is on the Internet is staggering. A quick scan of the politics section of Digg is embarrassing as half the stories are baseless conspiracy theories. Blogs will certainly never replace traditional news outlets, as they are far too biased and basically just rehash what traditional news outlets report; except they do it with their biased opinion.
There is a certain group of people, I wont name any names, but they seem to cheer the end of traditional media and are excited about an economic collapse as it will legitimize their ideology. - inactive, on 01/25/2008, -2/+4Why traditionnal publications will always be better than blogs:
"both reporters were extremely thorough, knowledgeable, and detailed. There were lots of follow-up calls, and both stories were then exhaustively fact checked and reviewed by an army of editors. Everything top-notch publications are supposed to do, they did, and then some."
Blogs aren't a source of news (on top of being the most vile word in the english language). If they are, then so are each and every one of my neighbours, who all have blogs that all contain the stupidest ***** you've ever read. - ThE0eNiGmA, on 01/25/2008, -0/+2I still have a use for that comics/crossword/puzzle section... when I am stuck somewhere with nothing else to do, like class, restaurant, bus, etc. Helps even more if the paper is free.
- orangetiki, on 01/25/2008, -0/+2Dugg down for being some random person's ramblings.
- MacEnvy, on 01/25/2008, -0/+2I use BugMeNot. Seems to work pretty well so far.
- HanSolo69, on 01/25/2008, -0/+2For the exact opposite reason why Digg is flourishing. Only more educated people tend to read print media, and as it moves online more and more of their advertising is overtly cheap pop-ups and probably will cripple your system with malware if you click on it. Digg on the other hand, is populated mostly by morons.
- Armstrong3, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1http://www.bugmenot.com
- Zippo, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Sorry to burst your bubble... but print isn't going anywhere just yet. I work at an advertising agency and do a lot of print material - and business is booming.
- mochaman, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Last time I check the kindle, or any other ebook reader for that matter, has not replaced pardon me an old traditional "printed" book. Print media is not doomed, I think that in the future we will have more choices and that's not a bad deal. I think we call use the convenience that technology brings us, but as far as I can see people will continue to rely on ink and paper for long and well research articles.
- robbh66, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Yes...This is exactly why people typically post a link in the first few comments to the actual story instead of the blogspam...because they prefer blogs...
- blackmage439, on 01/25/2008, -1/+2This is the same reason the RIAA and MPAA are screwing themselves now. It's not that they're technologically inept, or grouchy old men who spite "new fangled gizmos" like the Internets. It's because they actually refuse innovation, and like those poor saps in the Matrix (don't worry, no full quote here), they are hopelessly dependent on 'the system' - aging business models and the status quo.
- donna1234, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1If you're lucky enough to get published in BusinessWeek, don't link to the article
http://www.highpr.net - ispellkonfusion, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Print media are still refusing to see that the internet is the future--let alone the present. I'm a journalism student and I don't subscribe to ANY newspapers because I get all my information online. Either that makes me a bad traditional journalist or a realist. I prefer the latter.
- kuzotz, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1I've seen poorly written articles from well renown publishers.
- The_Dude, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Actually, a lot of the things that were on the internet die far sooner than their print counterpart. I mean I was looking at my Delicious bookmarks and stuff just a couple years old is 404. Whereas I can go to a library and see microfiche of a newspaper from god knows how long ago. Or dig out a NY Times paper from 2001 in my attic and very carefully read it. I doubt I could freely find NYT content from 2001 on their site.
- nickbotner, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1People have been saying Print is dead for years now... it doesn't seem dead to me.
- cabbey, on 01/25/2008, -2/+3Did you read the rest of the article?
- Takfam, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Print media will be dead when the postal service dies and not one second before. As long as we still transmit information on paper, advertisers will continue to transmit their information and products on paper.
- LouiseBonde, on 01/26/2008, -0/+15) Irrelevant Soft News (because I really don't care how to grow beautiful Petunias, and because cute tales of the personal success of others don't interest me)
- inactive, on 01/27/2008, -1/+2People are sick of leftist lies in the print media and are moving to the internet.
- pcpimpster, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Before the internet I bought magazines... now, I don't even have to buy one of my favorite mags which is maxPC.
http://www.maximumpc.com/articles/PDF+Archive
I tend not to buy any sort of media that isn't digitally delivered through a device of some sort. Quite frankly, i hate paper.
- ThE0eNiGmA, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Not everyone has the time or the forethought to do that. And some people just like paper, if only to wipe their ass with afterwards...
- designer, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1I work in the printing industry and people have been saying for years that print is dead. Not so.
- chall85, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1The New York Times is making more money than ever, has a completely free website with hundreds of very good reporters and great articles from all over the world. Just saying.
- SevenC, on 01/26/2008, -0/+1What's worrisome to me about this is how Print Media may try to stiffle other sites like by threatening them when they deep-link. Think of the impact to sites like Digg.com
Hope they don't find out how many deep links there are on Digg:
http://digg.com/search?s=businessweek.com&submit=S ...
And hope they don't find out how much more traffic Digg gets than BW:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/ ...
Instead of learning how to better use the web to improve business, they might follow what the Studios have done and send out their lawyers. - inactive, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1In 50 years print media will STILL be more revelent than BLOGS ever were.
- QueEsAmor, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Whenever this comes up in any journalism class I've taken, we always come to the conclusion that print media isn't going anywhere, it's just trying to evolve into something new with the rise of Internet publications and the multi-media possibilities they bring. It'll take awhile, but people aren't going to abandon the medium.
- bdette, on 01/26/2008, -0/+1I believe it. I mean look at what is going on at the Los Angeles Times.
- ChaosMotor, on 01/26/2008, -0/+1I use it, but it doesn't always work, and when it doesn't, goodbye, so long.
- stickywheelz, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1This isn't an article about print media being doomed. Its more an article about a few specific print media companies with crappy online policies. Buried.
- WhoDoneIt, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1It's too hard to sit on the can and read a laptop. Just for that reason alone print media will not die.
- ka9dgx, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1I use my laptop on the commuter train... it's nice to be able to work, relax playing a game, sorting photos, or doing slide-shows of my daughter for my friends, or the occasional use to amuse bored children with interesting photos.
Trying to read a paper on a moving, swaying train is a bad thing for me. The laptop is a ton easier to deal wtih. -
Show 51 - 79 of 79 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is