Jason Preston has an interesting post at Eat Sleep Publish on the false either, or dichotomy of newspaper vs. blogs.
He's commenting on a piece by a writer named Emily White, who complains that art and theater critics are being kicked to the curb at major dailies, while sports pages never receive any cutbacks. White goes on to criticize bloggers, falsely assigning quality to all things print.
It is both incredibly difficult and unbelievably important to get past the preconception that something published online is inherently less good than something that sits in ink on real paper. In fact, the internet is a far more meritocratic medium than anything ever before it: unlike anywhere else, your work stands for itself.
I no longer subscribe to a local daily, after having two delivered to my door for nearly two decades. The reason; lack of content.
On Sunday, my better half returned from the supermarket with the week's groceries, and also the Maine Sunday Telegram. A publication that used to occupy well over an hour on a Sunday morning, and 2-3 cups of joe, was easily digested in 10-15 minutes and quickly deposited in the newspaper recycling bin, most likely becoming firestarter the next time I fire up the woodstove.
I've unintentionally become someone that gets my news online. I don't feel any less informed, either. In fact, I can spend 30 minutes in the morning, before work, check a few financial sites at noon, and do an evening scan of key sites like Alltop and my jones for solid journalism is satiated.
Any other longtime newspaper folks forsaking the fishwrap for the interwebs?