A decade ago it was still common for US newspaper editors to complain about references to the web or internet because readers had neither access to the technology nor were they interested. This week, the havoc wrought by the technology on print journalism was plain to see.
On Monday, Time Inc., the world's largest magazine publisher, announced deep cuts in editorial staff and the closure of bureaus in the US and around the world. The company said it would shift capital investment and resources to the web, changes it said were "brought upon us by some real cold hard facts when it comes to how this business is run, and how media is changing."
On Wednesday, the Los Angeles Times announced much the same. A steep decline in print advertising revenue was forcing changes that even a year ago would have seemed |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
Job losses signal a volte-face over the media’s role, says edward helmore in New York |
| |
outlandish. The paper's 940 journalists would have to abandon their 'bunker mentality' and view latimes.com as the paper's primary outlet for news.
The print edition, if it is to survive at all, will have to follow and complement the internet edition; journalists will need to deliver reports in print, by audio and with video, and be able to do it from a laptop. The Wall Street Journal has already moved most of its breaking news to wsj.com; the Washington Post shifted its focus to the web.
The news is a shock but hardly a surprise: we already know the lead story in the paper before it lands on the doorstep. In Britain, papers like the Telegraph and the Guardian realised this some time ago. Now the American media is seeing that a new game is in play; the future is flexible and multiplatform, and positions have been reversed. 
FIRST POSTED JANUARY 26, 2007 |
