Online news is an "inferior good"

My professor said something today that really made me think -- yes, I do that sometimes. She called online news an "inferior good." She explained that the more income a person has, the more likely they are to go elsewhere for their news -- not online, and she has research to support this. People like to go online because it's free, obviously, but if you have money, you're more likely to go elsewhere, and probably pay for it (i.e. newspaper, magazine, cable). What's not said here is that the same information is online.

I don't know why this research finding bothers me.

Memorable news with a touch of humor

I like how people can learn their news from late-night television. There's something about humor that makes things memorable. Why? If only newswriting could tap into emotions more (preferably more positive), news would be memorable.

For example, I know that Sarah Palin is from Alaska, is pro-gun and pro-hunting from reading a dozen or so stories about her. But these bullet points aren't exactly meaningful until they are spelled out in a skit, or a rap. In case you didn't see SNL, enjoy. (The moose is my favorite.)

Where did you learn that? Um, I don't know.

Do you ever find that when you're talking about a news story often you don't know where you heard, read or saw it? I'm finding this more and more with me. People are blasted with so much information that knowing the original source takes one more bit of brain power to remember. I now have to make mental notes of where I get my information. I find it fascinating how conversations have changed. For example, I read a while back, somewhere, when Expedia and Priceline were still kind of new, people no longer bragged about their vacations as much but instead bragged about the bargains they got to get there -- airfare, hotel, car rental, etc.

I just find it interesting how technology can change what we talk about and focus on -- the news story, not the source; the airfare not the vacation itself. OK. I'm off to read news somewhere.

My 15 minutes of opportunity

One night this week, a person, who shall remain nameless, asked me my thoughts about the future of print newspapers. Let's just say this person is at the highest level in a news organization. My eyes lit up, my adrenaline started pumping, and there I was with the full attention of a person who could make change happen. I had to tell this person in not so many words my thoughts -- ideas I've been kicking around, suggestions, obstacles, what young people want. Where do I begin? What do I include? How should I convey dismay? Should I be careful with what I say or be frank? I took a deep breath, looked at this person, and said:

"I think the print industry is killing itself. We aren't open to change in the newsroom. We are so busy putting out the daily print newspaper and making deadline that we don't have time to think about the future of journalism. Even the tiniest of changes are hard to do (and I give an example). It's frustrating to see and be a part of. This medium has elitist thinking, like "If you don't like us, so what" and that's wrong. We aren't listening to what people who don't read the print newspaper (especially young people) are saying. And we're not open to their ideas for improving the paper. It's not a decline in readership that's hurting newspapers. It's us."

I offered two suggestions for change (exclusive content, searchable news) but I think I rattled them off so quickly, that they didn't have time to sink in. I'm a big believer you can always say what's wrong with the newspaper industry, but offering ideas for change is more important. Also, I didn't have to be careful about making sure I used the word "we" and "us," because I did so naturally. I consider myself part of this resistance-to-change industry, even though I push for improving journalism or trying new things on what seems to be a daily basis.

This person was stunned, it seemed, a bit silent, and then confided in me some business model changes that will soon come to be, which was prefaced with, "You probably won't like." I listened and this person was right. I was disgusted.

I left this 15-minute conversation with mixed feelings. Happy that here was someone generally interested in my thoughts about the newspaper industry as a researcher and that I could share my opinions and ideas, but then overly concerned about the direction of newspapers. I can only say that I will keep working on ways to improve journalism, maybe somewhere, some day it will pay off.