Speculating the Future of Publications

I have just read in a recent issue of Time magazine that the Ann Arbor newspaper, Anne Arbor News has closed down and transitioned into an online-only publication. Before Anne Arbor, it was the Rocky Mountain News in Denver which closed after 149 years of business. And I fear that this trend will continue in the years to come. This may sound like a depressing blog but there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Currently, the only move a publication can make to sustain itself is to move into a digital format ie online. While it's cheaper and more efficient, it is also tougher to monetize. Some online publications are taking steps to ensure that their writers, editors, and staff members are getting paid. Washingtonpost.com requires an account membership to view most of it's content. Soon, I'm afraid that they will be charging for content. The only reason to be fearful of this idea is that, most of the time, people don't like to pay for things that they normally get for free.

The New York Times has a great little application called The New York Times Reader which is an Adobe Air app. It is a scalable auto-updating app that lets you read The New York Times in a sleek off-line window. You can subscribe to the Reader for $3.75/week.

So some publications are protecting themselves, some are not, and some simply can't. Some are simply too small to compete. And as fewer and fewer publications survive, the World Wide Web will be the only sustainable source of information. It's cheap, easy to access, and anyone can contribute. And therein lies the problem.

The great thing about newspapers and magazines is that they have editors and fact-checkers. Bloggers do not. Bloggers can literally say whatever they want and their blogs can be read by anyone all over the world. This is a dangerous concept.

Having said that, here is my timeline of the next 25 years:

The Approaching Storm: 2010 - 2015
Most of the small market newspapers have shut down or gone to an online-only format. The major papers will survive (New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, a few others) but cling desperately to life. The web however has grown significantly. Nearly everyone is a blogger of some kind either through blogging sites, Twitter, Facebook, or other sites. The volume of information explodes and as a result the reliability of this information wains.

The Dark Age of Information: 2015 - 2025
Nearly all newspapers and publications cease their traditional paper circulation. As the web explodes with content, online publications become lost in the fray. Information, regardless of merit or credibility, is consumed and spread. Few blogs and sites are reliable because no one is being paid to research and fact-check. The quality of information and content also plummets. In this time, all web content mirrors YouTube content of today. In other words, it's 99% crap. Not only is this the Dark Age of Information but it is also the Dark Age of Business and Innovation. As the credibility of information is threatened in the way that it is, global infrastructures become weakened and innovation comes to a screeching halt.

The Quiet Revolution: 2025 - 2030
An awakening has begun–a quiet revolution. The world is tired of unreliable information and socioeconomic stagnation. They want rich content, not fluffy or bogus stories and information. Bloggers become responsible in their posts. They do research and begin fact-checking. They don't update their blog or micro-blog or Facebook or whatever every hour. They wait for something relevent to happen. They start writing about relevent topics. As a result, web traffic and content slowly begins to plateau and then decline.

The Return of the Editor: 2030 - 2035
A new system is born out of the catastrophe that was the end of modern publications. I have no idea what this will look like–perhaps a new technology is born where documents can be downloaded onto an ultra-thin paper-like material. Perhaps information can be directly downloaded into an individual's brain. Perhaps things just stay on the web, if it still exists. Whatever the system is, one thing has definitely changed: People are being paid to write, fact-check, and edit content. And as a result, information is more reliable and the world works more efficiently. Individuals realize that not everyone should be spreading information because not everyone is capable of editing and fact-checking.

How editors and writers get paid is another question. The idea of paying for information is nothing new but it sort of is. I can go on Google and get millions of pages of information for free. Probably about .o1% of it is relevant and reliable. But I've never had to pay for that information. Perhaps in the future, I will. People need to realize that information is as important as the food we eat, which we are willing to pay for. You wouldn't eat spoiled food just because it is free. The same goes for information. In the end, you're not simply paying for information–you're paying for credibility, reliability, and an earnestness toward truth.

Having said all of that, I am fact-checking right now. Everything seems okay. I just want to add a disclaimer to this so I don't seem hypocritical. This is clearly speculation. I have no idea if anything is going to come to fruition. I hope it doesn't. But I just wanted to illustrate a possibility. If you don't want this to happen, all I can recommend is that you purchase a newspaper subscription and appreciate the importance of credible and reliable information.

-Edited by Jenna Boswell