With the rise of TV and movies in the 1950's and 60's, people began to think that the book industry was going to take a large hit. However, they were wrong. "In 1950, more than 11,000 new book titles were introduced, and by 2007 publishers were producing over fifteen times that number" (315). The book industry flourished and overcame its challenges, and it continues to do well today. Books serve a different purpose to people than movies do. They allow people's minds to wander, anything is possible with a book in your hand. When I am reading a book I can imagine what characters look like, what their surroundings look like, and wonder about the plot all at the same time. Movies and television shows have restrictions, they only allow you to see what is in front of you. With a book, its much more. One persons interpretation can be completely different than someone else's.
I've said it for just about every type of media, and it's no different for books, the digital age is going to change the way we read books. Older books are starting to be digitized so that the information inside of them is not lost throughout the years. That's not the only thing that is changing though. In the not too distant future you may be reading and flipping through a book, without any paper. A book without paper? I know crazy right? However, Amazon introduced a new e-book reader...The Kindle is a lightweight, think reader with an easy-on-the-eyes electronic paper display" (329). With this new technology, people can download books from Amazon.com straight onto their Kindle and read full length books. Personally, I would love to read books on the kindle. I hate having to hold a bulky book in my hand and turn the pages just to have the book fold up on itself. It also eliminates the need to carry around a number of books. With a Kindle that's all you need, and you can read as much and as often as you like. On the contrary, I know some people like to actually physically have the book itself in their hands at times. I guess they will just have to either deal with the bulky book or adapt to new technology.
Coming across the paragraph about banned books had me thinking about one book in particular, The Catcher in the Rye. This book is one of the most challenged books I know of and is said to have many underlying themes, that are seen by some but not all. I read this book in my junior year, and honestly I was confused as to why this book was so controversial. I read a book about a whiny kid who wouldn't stop talking about how phony everyone was, when all the while he seems like a phony. You have probably heard all about how the book is what prompted the shooting of John Lennon. The shooter was arrested with a copy of the book in his hand. However, my favorite look at the book was the South Park episode where the kids of South Park are assigned this book and told that it is very controversial. They all speed through the book reading it cover to cover only to realize that the book is not as controversial as they thought. I love it so much because I felt the same exact way as they did. I got through the entire book and thought "I just read a book". Then one of the boys, "Butters", finishes the book and says to himself "kill John Lennon". Only to find out from his dad that John Lennon is already dead. It is a funny take on the book and I easily connected with it.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Chapter 9
It is hard to imagine magazines as "general interest" but they were. "After the war and through the 1950's, general interest magazines were the most prominent publications, offering occasional investigative articles but also covering a wide variety of topics aimed at a broad national audience" (289). If magazines were like this today, they would be out of business. Nowadays, people can get their general interest news instantly from TV, the internet, and daily in newspapers. If they had to wait for a magazine to come out, they would probably cease to function. I know that whenever I hear someone talking about a story that I don't know about I feel so out of the loop and sometimes even dumb. Maybe that is the problem with news now, there is so much of it that we have trouble sorting out the important news, from the ridiculous stories. Just the other day I say a story from ESPN saying that Dallas Cowboys running back Marion Barber would be letting his dreadlocks hang out of his helmet this upcoming week. REALLY? Is that honestly newsworthy? However, if they don't report it then someone else will. Which begs the question, How much news is too much news?
With the internet, newspapers, and round the clock TV news, magazines have had to adapt many times throughout the years. They have now become the most specialized form of print to date. With many different categories ranging from consumer magazines to farm magazines. Personally, I enjoy reading magazines like Sports Illustrated. It features a number of different sports articles and they always have the best pictures in them as well. Being specialized, magazines were able to go where TV and newspapers wouldn't go. For example "Playboy, started in 1953 by Hugh Hefner, was the first magazine to do this by undermining the conventional values of pre-World War II America and emphasizing previously taboo subject matter" (296). Playboy magazine focuses on more adult subject matter, and of course features pictures of beautiful naked women. It reached a certain niche audience that TV simply couldn't reach. That is why it was so successful.
With all the capabilities and the wide reach of the internet, it is only a matter of time before all magazines have at least some online articles. It is already starting, there are full online magazines such as Salon and Slate, and also print magazines with online articles such as Time and Entertainment Weekly. The media convergence doesn't stop there. It is also seen in the opposite direction, like "cable network ESPN started ESPN The Magazine" (302). Whenever I go onto espn.com I always see links to ESPN The Magazine writers, articles, and covers. The website and the cable channel alike are great advertisers for their magazine. People who just can't get enough ESPN can now see it everywhere. Also, "Oprah Winfrey's O: The Oprah Magazine, and Reader's Digest's launch of Everyday with Rachael Ray" take advantage of the popularity of TV shows (303). Media convergence is everywhere, you just have to look.
With the internet, newspapers, and round the clock TV news, magazines have had to adapt many times throughout the years. They have now become the most specialized form of print to date. With many different categories ranging from consumer magazines to farm magazines. Personally, I enjoy reading magazines like Sports Illustrated. It features a number of different sports articles and they always have the best pictures in them as well. Being specialized, magazines were able to go where TV and newspapers wouldn't go. For example "Playboy, started in 1953 by Hugh Hefner, was the first magazine to do this by undermining the conventional values of pre-World War II America and emphasizing previously taboo subject matter" (296). Playboy magazine focuses on more adult subject matter, and of course features pictures of beautiful naked women. It reached a certain niche audience that TV simply couldn't reach. That is why it was so successful.
With all the capabilities and the wide reach of the internet, it is only a matter of time before all magazines have at least some online articles. It is already starting, there are full online magazines such as Salon and Slate, and also print magazines with online articles such as Time and Entertainment Weekly. The media convergence doesn't stop there. It is also seen in the opposite direction, like "cable network ESPN started ESPN The Magazine" (302). Whenever I go onto espn.com I always see links to ESPN The Magazine writers, articles, and covers. The website and the cable channel alike are great advertisers for their magazine. People who just can't get enough ESPN can now see it everywhere. Also, "Oprah Winfrey's O: The Oprah Magazine, and Reader's Digest's launch of Everyday with Rachael Ray" take advantage of the popularity of TV shows (303). Media convergence is everywhere, you just have to look.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Chapter 8
The biggest thing that has made newspapers important over the years is their nack for investigative journalism. This all started with yellow journalism in the 1800's. This idea of "exciting human-interest stories, crime news, [and] large headlines" is still in high demand today (254). We always see stories about gang violence, what elected officials are doing with our money, and much more. The most recent story that I can think of is the controversy with former Governor Eliot Spitzer. Spitzer had paid for a prostitute and was eventually forced out of office. These investigative reports and stories are followed closely by all. Why? Because we are nosy. Because we want to know what's going on with people's lives. So authors write about it and we read it. This is how yellow journalism became so popular, and still is alive today.
The two types of newspapers that started to emerge in the 1800's, that would pave the way for future newspapers, were the story driven model and the "just the facts" model. To me "just the facts" seems a little on the boring side. Even as a writer that would not be a fun paper to write for. Instead of creating an article you are simply copying down facts that are given to you. Where's the fun in that? With all the newspapers using this style and just simply telling the people what the government wanted to tell them, when World War I broke out everyone was in a panic. As one scholar described it ""the American people were utterly amazed when war broke out in August 1914, as they had no understanding of the foeign scene to perpare them for it" (258). This is why it is important to be subjective. It is our right to say what we want, when we want to. Some may argue that it is our duty to keep officials in check through criticism. Walter Lippman explains what the press should do by saying "(1) 'to make a current record'; (2) 'to make a running analysis of it'; and (3) 'on the basis of both, to suggest plans'" (258).
Newspapers today are definitely losing their edge. With the internet at everybody's fingertips and the news on cable channels like CNN and ESPN, newspapers are the last thing on a teenagers mind nowadays. I know that I am more prone to look to the internet for news instead hunting through the Buffalo News. So to stay afloat newspapers are starting to go digital. While it may seem that newspapers are losing steam, don't count them out just yet. This idea is highlighted in our book: "While some observers think newspapers are on the verge of extincion as the digital age eclipese the print era, the industry is no dinosaur...the history of communication demonstartes that older mass media have always adapted" (274). It may be a tall order, but if history repeats itself, our children just may be reading newspapers after all.
The two types of newspapers that started to emerge in the 1800's, that would pave the way for future newspapers, were the story driven model and the "just the facts" model. To me "just the facts" seems a little on the boring side. Even as a writer that would not be a fun paper to write for. Instead of creating an article you are simply copying down facts that are given to you. Where's the fun in that? With all the newspapers using this style and just simply telling the people what the government wanted to tell them, when World War I broke out everyone was in a panic. As one scholar described it ""the American people were utterly amazed when war broke out in August 1914, as they had no understanding of the foeign scene to perpare them for it" (258). This is why it is important to be subjective. It is our right to say what we want, when we want to. Some may argue that it is our duty to keep officials in check through criticism. Walter Lippman explains what the press should do by saying "(1) 'to make a current record'; (2) 'to make a running analysis of it'; and (3) 'on the basis of both, to suggest plans'" (258).
Newspapers today are definitely losing their edge. With the internet at everybody's fingertips and the news on cable channels like CNN and ESPN, newspapers are the last thing on a teenagers mind nowadays. I know that I am more prone to look to the internet for news instead hunting through the Buffalo News. So to stay afloat newspapers are starting to go digital. While it may seem that newspapers are losing steam, don't count them out just yet. This idea is highlighted in our book: "While some observers think newspapers are on the verge of extincion as the digital age eclipese the print era, the industry is no dinosaur...the history of communication demonstartes that older mass media have always adapted" (274). It may be a tall order, but if history repeats itself, our children just may be reading newspapers after all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)