& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

End of the line of daily newspapers?

Editorial desk
MEDIA mogul Rupert Murdoch, head of News Corp and owner of many newspapers in the US, UK and Australia, recently announced he would soon start charging for news content on some of his websites. "Quality is not cheap," Murdoch was quoted as saying in mid-August.
The announcement by arguably the world's most powerful media mogul is the latest move by those in the US newspaper industry attempting to deal with print media's declining advertisement and sales revenues. Ads have melded in large numbers on to on-line and other media as advertisers try to reduce expenditure and zoom on to more specific target audiences, hurting newspapers in particular, the purveyors of general news.
The phenomena is being played out not just in the West but also in Asia, Thailand included. Younger generations tend to read free news on the Internet, raising the vital question as to whether the death of general
quality newspapers is imminent.
At about the time of Murdoch’s announcement, the July/August issue of Columbia Journalism Review warned: "Today we face the prospect of, at east in term of serious journalism, going from something to nothing."
The magazine, published by Columbia University's prestigious Graduate School of Journalism defended the relevance of quality corporate newspapers by stating: "[N|one of the innovations thus far has produced the kind of public-service journalism that our newspapers, at their best, still manage to deliver
"Yes, newspapers behaved for decades like arrogant monopolists. But they also have been an increasingly lonely bastion for serious journalism [...] We need professional journalism. It doesn't have to be delivered on paper; it need not be produced by omnibus newsrooms with twelve hundred reporters and editors; and it can surely be complemented by amateur efforts," the editorial stated, adding that it nevertheless must be done by people who
have time and commitment to painstaking work - something that cannot be done in spare time.
Not everyone in US thinks those in the industry know how to deal with the crisis, however.
"Journalists are not wrong to think that the field of journalism has a unique social value. But as many in the corporate press are understandably focused on whether their particular jobs will be saved, these folks may be exactly the wrong people to explain what's going to happen to media business," wrote Peter Hart a director at Extra, a quality non-profit Media Watch magazine based in New York.
Like it or hate it, the so-called quality broadsheet newspaper, whether continuing in a print format or hot, will have to strive to make itself relevant to the changing times. If it fails it will go the way of the dinosaur -- and some have already fallen and at an increasingly alarming rate, not just in US but elsewhere too.
Trying to make itself relevant does not mean 'tabloidising' itself. Instead it should redouble its efforts to produce quality journalism distinguishing itself from other forms of media. Quality investigative reporting requires time, commitment and brains. But together with better editorial, analysis, and commentaries, newspapers may hope to remind the public of their relevance and how they assist people to making sound political, social and economic decisions and to put things in con-
text.
These are invaluable and an essential prerequisite for any democracy to thrive. Print media must be aware that while it cannot compete in terms of speed with other news media, it has the ability to add value and depth rather titan delivering knee-jerk reactions.
Greater commitment to the public for support and less reliance on advertisers is also crucial to assuring the public that newspapers are not lap dogs of advertisers and major shareholders, and are relevant in the twenty-first century.
If what they offer is in the end deemed irrelevant by the public and no better titan what exists already for free on the Internet, then it's time to bow from the stage.
Some critics wonder whether Murdoch would succeed in charging for on-line news content that may not be unique. The Murdoch-owned The Wall Street Journal charges fees and is a success, due to its specialised readership and expert content.
However, if most general newspapers do become extinct, both on and off- line, society may become more fragmented and weakened as people turn to increasingly specialised news. Society without commentary and in-depth news and analysis in the general discourse, may end up decimating itself into small pockets of people hardly relating or feeling empathetic to one another.
©The Nation. All rights reserved. Repnnted by arrangement with Asia News Network.