Once upon a time, iTunes saved Apple and the music industry from destruction. David Carr's column in the NYT Sunday proposed that we find a similar way to save newspapers.
Some say that we already have the answer: Amazon's Kindle. With the ability to combine paid subscriptions with downloadable MP3s, books, magazines, and audio-books, the Kindle is bound to cause quite a stir. The Kindle makes it easier and more efficient to read a newspaper.
Others of us aren't so excited about a monopoly on newspaper readership. Freedom to listen to whatever music you want is one thing. Freedom of the press is something completely different. Yes, maybe something like the Kindle could help bolster newspapers for a little while, but I don't believe that it's a good idea in the long run.
Newspapers and information are supposed to be available to everyone. Our country and the journalism industry itself have consciously kept prices of newspapers low so that the majority of Americans can afford to be informed. If all Americans are eventually expected to buy a Kindle to read their newspaper, readership is going to go way, way down. People are going to be uninformed and they're going to feel alienated by the press, which is the last thing journalists want. The Kindle needs some healthy competition - other ways to read newspapers electronically that are both more affordable and less affordable, more convenient and less convenient, etc.
Let people make their own choices; don't let Amazon and newspapers make the choices for them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment