Comments on: Change is now old news

By: Natalie Freeman

Natalie Freeman — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:55:43 +0000

I found some of this very interesting. I had always wondered why journalists kept those ancient (yet very cool looking) typewriters and machines in their offices. I never understood that it was a source of pride for them. I now look at those offices I see with old machines in them in a new light. I think it’s funny that they would hide their old typewriters and use them instead of the new ones. I also think that the change could help journalists to focus more on content than on all the bells and whistles. I think that no matter the changes, it is just important that journalists remember why they are doing their job and what their responsibilities and priorities are.

By: Jim Willis

Jim Willis — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:24:05 +0000

Colin, thanks for the thoughtful response on this post.

By: Colin Campbell

Colin Campbell — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:44:30 +0000

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this article regarding the immense change there is in how the media does its process. It is so advanced in comparison to what traditional journalists did in the 1950’s, 1960’s era to the now “digitized” era of technology. Everything journalist need to do to jot down their notes, and even create a new article can be right there at their fingertips. I believe that if you are a great journalist you will be able to the great advances in society.

By: Bryan Carson

Bryan Carson — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 01:11:03 +0000

i think this article is fascinating in that the new technology could bring both good and bad things to the world of reporting. i agree with aprils comment that while the new technology may make it easier for big name news reporters to get their stories out to the masses, it also allows any person off the street to see an event and report on it with their own spin. this leads to people reading their news in many different places and not getting the same story. the problem with this is that the viewers and readers are going to start getting suspicious and they might not even believe anything they hear, which would be a shame. i think that the introduction of new technology is a great thing, as long as viewers or readers are careful about where they go to get their news.

By: Mariya Wilson

Mariya Wilson — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 07:02:35 +0000

It is rather humorous how reporters refused to give up their Royal manuals, even as they were ordered by editors to replace them with the new Selectrics. The fact that they hid their relics demonstrates the human’s need for consistency and know-how. Though as humorous as the scenario sounds, I often do not like change myself, and so I can see how difficult it must have been for those reporters to dive into a new territory with unfamiliar technology and totally new techniques. The Royal manuals were symbolic of the reporters’ hard work and livelihood: they mastered the art of journalism on these devices…reporters did not have the same connection with Selectrics. This dilema is sort of like having to buy a new football couch-seat, when the one you had previously was perfectly fine and absolutely comfy!

By: April Overholt COMM 200

April Overholt COMM 200 — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 19:15:07 +0000

I never thought about the technology used in reporting in terms of the content that is produced. You seem to be saying that changes in technology will not necessarily affect this content… but what about the issue of citizen journalism? Because blogs have made it possible for anyone with an Internet connection to post news for thousands of others to read, the quality of their news reporting can be diminished. Mass audiences can hear content on a major broadcasting company that is relatively trustworthy; however, they can now also get their news from a disgruntled citizen who distorts the information to their advantage in a rant on their blog. So, I think it is possible to use new technology without changing the content, but I think it can still have a great impact on content as well, if we let it.