Resistance to Change, Arggghh

In reading this book chapter, I ran across a quote from 1994 by media critic Jon Katz in Wired Magazine.

Sometimes I have difficulty articulating the thoughts in my head about my frustration with this industry. Give me a sheet of paper to write on, and you will see my passion. Katz does exactly this, but in a way that grabs me, holds me and leaves me angry:

"The newspaper industry has never liked change, viewing it rather the way a Temperance Lady viewed speakeasies. For a long time, papers have demonstrated an unerring instinct for making the wrong move at the wrong time. At heart, newspapers are reluctant to change because of their ingrained belief that they are the superior, serious, worthwhile medium, while things electronic are trivial or faddish.

Over the past decade, newspapers have made almost every kind of radical move except transforming themselves. It's as if they've considered every possible option but the most urgent - change. Times Mirror Co., publishers of the Los Angeles Times, bought newspapers, magazines, cable systems, and TV stations. Recently, the company appeared to be returning to its printed roots, selling off its cable properties a year after selling its TV stations.

That makes newspapers the biggest and saddest losers in the information revolution. With the possible exception of network-TV newscasts, papers are now our least hip medium, relentlessly one-way, non-interactive, and smug. We all know the formula: Plopped on the doorstep once a day. Breaking national and international news up front, local news next, stories broken up and jumping inside. Grainy, mostly black-and-white photos. Culture, features, TV, listings, recipes, and advice columns in the back. Stentorian voices on the editorial page. Take it or leave it, and if you don't like it, write us a letter."

-- So true.