A long time ago people learned how to write. At the beginning it was only pictures; people drew animals, food, life and everything that they saw around. Over time, the picture became more complicated and then ancient people invented letters. Every letter meant a subject. However, that was too hard to remember every “letter” because there are a million things around us. Later, they invented letters, that meant sounds. They created words and sentences and from this moment people started their academic education.
When people talk about journalism they think about the invention of writing. But journalism is not just words on paper. According to the dictionary, journalism is “gathering, processing, and dissemination of news, and information related to news, to an audience”(Oxford). It means that it’s not only about writing. People read books to entertain themselves, but we read news articles and watch the news on TV to keep up with current events. In modern society, this is the part of an “educated” person. We are talking about journalism as about the easy way to know what’s going on in the world. Consequently, this field must develop as fast as our world does. Computers, laptops, smartphones, watches. It is all digital, it all contains the information, it is all easy and, maybe, the digital world is our future. What would our grandparents have said if we could have told them that people would make calls using their watches? Isn’t it crazy to even think about it?
Thereby, the journalism is developing at the same level as our society’s requirements – it is all about technology. However, along with journalism, the journalists must be advanced too. Have you ever heard about blogging? I am sure you have. Now this is very popular; almost every teenager wants to be a blogger. So what do we have? Twitter and Facebook are the new The New York Tribune and The Washington Times? Could these bloggers be counted as true journalists? People from my father’s generation say that the journalism lost its charm and became just a routine. 20 years ago people could sit in their huge chairs with a warm fireplace and read their favorite paper. However now, we check our new on the smartphones:fast, just to get some information. No romantic indeed. Still, there are people who believe that every development is for the best.
For me, as for the future journalist, these questions play a significant role. That’s why I decided to write my research paper, exploring this question. All of the articles presented below develop this question. I chose them because we can see three different perspectives: Rebecca Wyde is a Journalism major who thinks that the future of journalism is the language itself, Michael McGrath is an experienced online editor who claims that paper journalism is dying, and Tom Engelhardt is an author and the creator of his own website who still believe in trusty papers.
Wyde, Rebecca Sian. “What Is the Future of Journalism?” The Guardian 15 April 2015: theguardian.com Web. 4 Apr. 2016.
The article by Rebecca Wyde, which helped her to win a grant at the University, develops a problem not only of journalism but the language in whole. People all around the world speak so many languages and, reading foreign or maybe world news, citizens of small countries could lose a big portion of meaning during the translation. Wyde believes that “everyone deserves to know what’s happening in our world, and thanks to incredible technological advances, we can now make this a priority”. The author provides an example when British ambassador, who was unable to speak the local language in Namibia, had huge problems in diplomacy. The same with journalism: understanding the differences between people is the way to their hearts which means that journalism is going to be in our lives for a long time.
However, understanding the differences may not be enough. “Technology is often touted as the future of journalism” . With the Internet, people can have quick access to every article but “which these interactions are allowed to take place can ultimately damage credibility: often there simply isn’t time to fact-check or proof-read properly, which can lead to a severe dip in journalistic quality”. So this way we can hurt someone with fast but unreliable information.
According to the author with this new digital world people can show their voices and their opinion. Yes, it may be harder with this amount of blogs, tweets and tumblr posts to find something reliable, but they have a platform to state themselves. And who knows, maybe these girls who write about some simple things like school days and their relationships with boys are future Diane Sawyer and Kate Adies and that’s how their future starts.
McGrath, Michael. “Nonprofit News: The Future of American Journalism?” National Civic Review 103.3 (2014): 34-39. Business Source Premier. Web. 4 Apr. 2015.
Michael McGrath writes an article about his own experience in the firm called I-News. The creator of the firm, Laura Frank, used to work as an editor in a local paper, but when she saw that the paper journalism is dying she decided to create her own project. I-News is an online source that works like a “chat” among the people. If you see the news that you’re interested in, you can leave a feedback and then the editors will adjust the articles based on the feedback. However, this type of comunication has a lot of difficulties. It’s very hard to read every feedback and then the editors have to check if this is truth or not. That way people don’t get the wrong information. The author says that despite that printing journalism is dying, online news is still not developed enough.
Engelhardt, Tom. “Are We Living In the Golden Age of Journalism?” The Nation 21 January 2014: TheNation.com Web. 4 Apr. 2016.
In the article by Tom Engelhardt, the author tells about journalism during his childhood and how is it different from now. When he was young, New York had few major papers like The Daily News, The Daily Mirror, The Herald Tribune and a few magazines: Life, The Saturday Evening Post, Look. Then he thought, that this is “the golden era of journalism”. All of these papers run the world, people got news from it and it was hard to imagine life without it. But what do we have now? Thousands of papers and magazines appear in our lives. We have a choice of what to read today. But these papers are still just papers. We read someone’s ideas and thoughts. The main burst happened when we got an online sources. The author says that “with the rise of the Internet, we’re no longer simply passive readers at the mercy of someone else’s idea of how to organize the worl”. Now, we can do it by ourselves.
“Journalism.” Oxford English Dictionary. 2005. p – 354. Oxford English Dictionary. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.