The Future of Television Stations?

Why would a TV station want to buy the newspaper? Get a dying print product and 7-8 employees the TV station has no use for?

The TV station can use that money on things that are infinitely more valuable.

 

It's still more likely to be the Birmingham News here (on one of the three days that they print a paper) or more properly Al.com, which still has a couple of dedicated and well connected investigative reporters/muckrakers.

 

Two of the three days that they print a newspaper here, by some odd coincidence.

 

Basically the melding of a TV-newspaper IS the Internet. Logically, it should work very well. But like I said, two mediums of storytelling that don't mesh well.

I worked for nearly 20 years online, and haven't found a single outlet that seems to know exactly how to do it well AND generate ad revenue. Every website wants to "pivot to video," which makes no sense, since we read faster than we watch things. Or worse, embed the video so it plays while you're trying to navigate the damn site. And don't get me started on the whitelist/paywall pop ups.

As far as radio:

1. If I didn't have an attributed local actuality (someone's voice on tape), the story didn't run. It takes 30 seconds to dial the mayor's office/police sergeant/school district for a comment on the record.

2. Newspapers aren't meant to be read aloud. I don't care if you write like Grantland Rice, it's going to sound horrible and stilted.

 

Bottom line for me is that I take in a lot more data faster by reading it. Most times video news has to waste a lot of time on background and setting the story in case the viewer is not familiar. I can't skip on down when listening to someone talk over pictures.

I'm good with that limited speed listening to NPR as I drive or something, since reading while you drive will wind up with you in a ditch.