The revolution that never happened

Steen Steensen is yet another journalist to explore the ways in which technology is changing the face of journalism in his blog new journalism/new media.

Steen notes, as many others have done, that media executives and academics alike making predictions that technology will revolutionise and perhaps cause the end of journalism as we know it, are wrong. He rightly argues that the majority of online newspapers are still producing written text for their audiences just like regular print publications do when there is a whole world of technology including hyperlinks, multimedia and ways to interact with their readers at their fingertips. All of this “great technology” is readily available so why aren’t they using it if it is supposed to be so revolutionary? I suppose it could be that online readers still want the same types of journalism as they would get in a print copy without having to go out and buy it and with the luxury of being able to read it on their smartphones or laptops. But if that’s the case, then what’s the point of having all of this new technology? 

Steen also notes that everyone believed that the telephone, television, radio and computers would cause “the end of history, the end of geography and the end of politics” but they definitely haven’t. They have changed the world and the way people access information but with each invention and technological change the others haven’t been wiped out and become redundant. None of the previous changes have killed journalism; so why should the internet? 

I have to say that I agree with Steensen, the internet will, inevitably, change journalism and the way we approach things but it won’t happen as quickly or as a dramatically as people seem to predict. The evolution will be slow and journalistic practice will continue to be the same but with adaptations for the online world.


The future of journalism

This week I have been looking at James Curran’s literature on the future of journalism in Technology Foretold and The Future of Journalism; within these two texts Curran looks at previous predictions about how technology will change society and journalism.

In Technology Foretold, James Curran highlights how the expectation and predictions surrounding technology in Britain in the 80’s and 90’s were rather far-fecthed and indeed, wrong. Leading industry experts, the media itself and the public believed that changes within technology would lead to forms of old media being completely wiped out and journalism and society would change dramatically. Kenneth Baker, the technology minister at the time, said that Cable TV would have “more far-reaching effects than the industrial revolution 200 years ago.” This highlights just how high expectation was and how oblivious people were to the reality. In reality, only 1% of homes had cable in 1989 and only 13% in 2008. This fact alone shows that the hype that surrounded this new technology was unnecessary and misplaced; also making it clear that you can’t really predict the future and what or how technology will effect journalism.

However, Curran also shows that it would naive to think that the ever evolving world of technology will not have some effect on the journalism industry. In The Future of Journalism he highlights the fact that the internet has had an effect on paid journalism jobs and a number of redundancies have been made as a result. For example, between 2008 and 2009, 106 local newspapers closed in Britain and The Trinity Mirror reduced its staff by 1200. Although this suggests that the internet has hindered old media in Britain, Curran is also keen to point out that new medias have been affected too as ITV had to cut 1000 jobs in the same year. James Curran explores all arguments within his articles and gives a well-balanced point of view.

I think that he makes it clear that you cannot predict the future and we can’t really see what direction journalism will go in, the world is constantly changing and technology is constantly evolving. Investors, advertisers and the public will have constantly evolving opinions and needs and the media can’t always predict those needs.

Blog at