Week 2 Response

As we all know the conventional form of journalism is dying. Anyone can go online and report about something that happened whether that be locally or nationally. Journalism just isn't the same and people are still coming to terms with that. However, one thing that will remain constant is paper and what gets put down on it. The biggest thing I took from both of these readings came from the "What society requires is reputable journalism" piece was that point exactly about paper always being a constant, reliable form of the truth to what people thought and felt. The article makes a great point in mentioning that in 100 years technology will definitely be different and what is on HDD's today will most likely be unreadable to the people of the 22nd century because of the storage systems and devices they will be using. But what gets put down on paper today, as long as it is kept intact, will be understandable and readable in 100 years. That is the one constant of journalism that will never die. As the other article discusses, not many people today are as good of writers as they were 80 years ago. The interesting leads and hooks just aren't the same. It has been a weird transition into people accepting non AP-style or traditional journalistic writing online and that being acceptable. Things are just flat out different. The biggest problem with this is that information cannot be considered reliable like it used to be. That is the one thing, as the "What society requires is reputable journalism" article mentions the internet cannot yet do; filter the truth from fiction. When this is able to happen then journalism will have completed its full transition from the 20th to the 21st century. But until this transition occurs, newspapers and the original form of journalism, going out and researching and gathering information for a story, will always hold pure value over what is said and put out over the medium of the internet.