The Observer is splendidly British in being difficult to place on any political spectrum dreamt up on the Continent and employed either by Marxists or else by people who believe that they are in reaction against Marxism, but who at the very least thus accept it as the frame of reference. It must be possible to come up with something along the lines of the National Trust or the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, perhaps only able to ensure a much more limited print run for however many years, but nevertheless keeping this national treasure in existence until better days.
As for the cancellation of Channel 4 News At Noon and of More 4 News, we need to keep a very close eye on what this publicly owned, public service broadcaster can still find the space and the money to broadcast. As well as on the sort of material that ITN still feels it worthwhile to produce.
And no, none of this is the Internet’s fault. No one who seriously writes or reads blogs is anything other than a newsprint addict as well. Reading a newspaper or a magazine online is nothing approaching the pleasurable experience of reading it the old-fashioned way. Nor has it the Radio Four-like serendipity: online, you cannot just turn the page and encounter an item utterly unexpected, utterly engrossing. Something very similar can be said about a high quality news bulletin. But it cannot be said about anything on the Net, however good.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"online, you cannot just turn the page and encounter an item utterly unexpected, utterly engrossing"
ReplyDeleteI have very often had the experience of clicking on a link in, or next to, a piece of writing online and being taken to an utterly unexpected, utterly engrossing, item. It's a very common phenomenon.
It must be linked in some way to what you are already reading.
ReplyDeleteLinked, as in hyperlinked, yes. But that's trivial. A website may well carry a link to something which has no particular connection with the article you're reading.
ReplyDeleteFor example, this Guardian story about Zimbabwe currently links to articles about social networking, high-speed rail, whole foods, peeing in the shower, and a man with a superglued penis.
I'm not sure "serendipity" is the word, but neither is "linked", in the way in which you mean it.
Reading a computer screen is much more tiring than reading a newspaper or a magazine. Heavy duty convalescence has taught me that.
ReplyDeleteAnd you still have to click on any of these links. You don't just turn the page and there are there.
My main point stands: the Internet is not killing print journalism, nor will it. If print journalism is in trouble, then it needs to look closer to home.
More specifically, the Guardian Group's scapegoating of the Observer, which it has consistently neglected, is contemptible. The readers now need to rise up and do something about it.
"The readers now need to rise up and do something about it."
ReplyDeleteUmmm... buy The Observer in sufficient numbers to make it commercially viable?
Buy it, anyway.
ReplyDeleteHow hard can that be if it's worthless?