Oh, Brave New World

For some time now, journalism has been criticized for dumbing itself down by focusing less on substance and more on jazzy presentation. Remember the movie Network? That movie was almost prophetic in its portrayal of news as infotainment. The culprit in the film was television--a medium that must have seemed quite threatening to the print media at the time. Little did they know what the future (and the Internet) would bring.

So, it's a little discouraging to read articles like this about Politico, an online news source that sounds less concerned with informing readers about significant events than titillating them with gossip. (It also sounds like a grueling place to work.) I'd like to think there's a future for real journalism--an online business model that will keep us truly informed and keep serious journalists gainfully employed--but articles like this . . . well, they just make me wonder.

On a somewhat related note, I see that Newsweek will be downsizing circulation and closing its London office. (Some of the staff were pretty ticked off to learn about this in the New York Times.) I suppose the good news is they'll be launching a new magazine in mid-May, which they say will focus on "less ambulance-chasing and more analytical pieces." (Newsweek chases ambulances?) Plus leaner staffing will mean more opportunities for freelancers to work for them as stringers.

So will print media continue to be the standard bearers of serious journalism? Will online media be able to match the depth of reporting found in print? Online readers are notoriously ADD. Generally, when it comes to online writing, shorter is better. Content boiled down to bite-sized bits under bold headings work better than lengthy tomes. Lists and bullet-pointed information make ideal Web content. But where does that leave in-depth reporting? Can you write effective online content about complex issues that require more than 1,000 words (if that many) to explain?

I think about these things and wonder. Are changing reading habits diminishing the quality of news we're getting? By going digital, are we saving trees, but losing a deeper understanding of the world?