When
the students of JOUR 199 took a field trip to the News-Gazette back in
September, we had the opportunity to go behind the scenes and get a glimpse of
what the creative process of publication entails. Not only were we exposed to
the writing and editing aspect at 15 E. Main Street, our tour guide led us down
the road to the publication’s original building that now houses the production
center. It was within the musty walls of this old structure that I became
fascinated with an enormous piece of machinery towering three-stories up from
the basement level, also known as the printing press.
Although the inner workings of this
kind of machine have been revamped and updated since its premiere debut around
1450, its creative objective remains the same: to produce words on paper. In
this case, the term “press” in its original meaning is no longer applicable,
with each template created electronically and printed on page at a must faster
pace. This particular machine makes use of tons of paper a week and thousands
of gallons of ink every couple of months to keep up with the publication’s
distribution demands. It’s a shame that these modern wonders are more increasingly
being written off as less-than-spectacular as advances in digital news continue
to unfold.
I experienced these dramatic changes
for myself during an honors blogging assignment this semester. My task was to
follow a particular news outlet’s coverage of a beat. In attempting to do so, I
noticed that many of the buildings on our campus only receive new issues of the
New York Times once or twice a week. This inconvenience forced me to explore
the publication’s online version, an exploration that often left me with a
feeling of nostalgia. Call me old fashioned, but experiencing the news on my laptop
is nothing compared to the feeling of a fresh ink copy, hot off the press and
into my hand.
I share your nostalgia! Every time I tell someone what my major is, I cringe as they say, "Aren't you afraid print journalism is a dying art?" Does the fact that we still have a college paper printed AND published online give you hope that it won't die? Why or why not? Do you see value in any particular new advancements in technology that benefit journalism, like twitter for example, and if so which ones and why? Which do you see as the most harmful to the process of printing we're so fond of?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of turning in a paper copy does give me hope that it won't die. I don't think it could ever be eliminated completely. It's just unfathomable to me, a world without newspapers. However, I do see some value in journalism's new use of Twitter. I think it allows the public to be informed at a much faster pace than ever possible through print. At the same time, I could also see Twitter having a harmful effect in that it allows for unpresidented rumors and slander to spread without justification.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunatly, I do have to disagree with both of you... I think print news is dying out and I agree that it is sad. I also think it is sad that paperback books are dying out due to electronic readers. There is nothing I love more than the smell of a good paper book.
ReplyDeleteKrystyna does make a good point however, on rumors spreading without justification. This worries me because I feel like so many terrible things will get spread so much faster.
Kendall, my mom said the same thing about paperbacks when I offered to get her a Kindle for Christmas last year. Some people just prefer the feeling of a book in their hands.
ReplyDeleteAs far as Twitter goes, I don't have one. Nor do I intend on creating an account. All the nonsense people post on there is just something else to distract me from doing my homework.
I didn't think the building smelled too musty. More inky if anything. That building looked like it could have used a good scrub down. But I do disagree with you, even though I am a news/editorial journalism major, I do believe that printed journalism will be an obsolete form of receiving the news. Us journalists need to keep up with technology, and the trends of our readers.
ReplyDeleteI agree that print material is more readable than online material. Especially when I'm reading a book or magazine, the tangible paper and smell of the ink makes the experience more memorable. I liked that you connected a personal observance, the unavailability of updated New York Times, to the printing press we visited. Out of interest, do you think that given all the material that goes into production, there may be a legitimate argument for newspapers going online?
ReplyDeleteAmaya, you could be right about the smell of the place. I just couldn't quite place it. As far as journalists keeping up with technology, that's a must. Otherwise, they wouldn't have jobs!
ReplyDeleteHana, I do believe there is a legitimate argument for newspapers going online. Unfortunately, doing so will most likely cost a lot of jobs. However, it will cut out the middle-men involved in the publication process and significantly reduce the cost of creating and distributing the information to readers.