I didn't read a newspaper this morning...

You see that's why I don't think it's inevitable, like a lot of people do, that newspapers will go completely online in the future. Until it's possible/convenient to take a computer into the shitter, on the subway during the morning commute, to the construction site during break, etc, etc, I think there will still be a demand for the real deal, hard copy paper.

 

You have a point on the subway, for now. And maybe on the construction site. But I've taken my laptop to the shitter; I'm not proud of it, but I have a wireless router, I prop the thing up on the hamper and it works quite nicely.

 

Yeah, but I bet you're not reading the newspaper online

Added: Damn, that was easy.

 

I'm more likely to read papers when I'm out of town, if only to see how other writers and designers do their thing. I'm visiting my North Carolina family this weekend, so I'm reading the Charlotte Observer. I'll probably pick up some combo of Winston-Salem, Greensboro, Raleigh and Durham on the drive back.

 

I've done the same, but I don't think it's widespread. I suspect that most blue-collar workers don't have laptops or wireless routers, and you might get some odd looks if you hauled the laptop into the shitter at work.

I'm far from an expert on the woes of this business and what solutions would at least slow the downsizing, but I've heard the suggestion that we need to target the upper-crust of society. I honestly believe these are the people who are relying less on the newspaper to get their news and are far more technologically savvy. I'm not saying we should dumb anything down, and I'm not saying that blue-collar workers are dumb, but I do think it's the working class who rely on newspapers more than the upper class.

 

Books still sell like hotcakes. Niche magazines of all stripes are doing well. Point still stands. Remember, the Net didn't kill the concept of going into stores to buy things.

 

Really, you probably could have said the same thing 30 years ago. Or 40. Or 50.

 

Interesting.

What's even weirder for me is that I've let all my newspaper subscriptions lapse... and my friggin' Treo is now part of my morning routine.

I grab my coffee, and as I'm running around the house doing laundry, etc., I read articles off Yahoo's mobile site, as well as ajc.com/mobile.

It's great because while I have the Treo in my hand, I can answer my phone, e-mail, text, or take a picture.

Weird, weird, weird....

 

I beg to differ. I have posted many times from the can.

 

Boy, that's a shock.

Anyhoo, we're acting as if people are sitting at their terminals all day and night looking at newspaper Web sites or doing so on their handhelds. Let's not fool ourselves. People out in the world are not of our demimonde, and they spend their time online surfing for porn, shopping, looking up sports scores, surfing for porn, chatting, posting on message boards, surfing for porn, viewing oddities, downloading music, playing games and surfing for porn far more than they are scouring for newspaper Web sites. And the handheld experience can be awkward, with small type and the constant clicking of links.

If newspapers are on the ice floe, we built our own bridge and crossed it ourselves.

 

Re: I didn\'t read a newspaper this morning...

Just got back from a road trip where I talked to a lot of other writers. One said in his state, the only paper with a rising, robust circulation is the one with the fewest free stories on its Web site.

He thinks that is no coincidence.

 

There may be some truth to that. I've heard others say the same thing.