Technology is always progressing. There is no way to stop the further progression of humans. But when it comes to journalism, is this a good or bad thing? Was the old way of doing things in the writing world more or less efficient? I don’t believe that anyone has fully attempted to answer this question, or if there is even an answer at this point. However, technology is changing the way that journalism works, even attempting to supposedly convert the entire industry to an electronic format, and there seems to be only a handful of people who really care about the effects that this might have.
Will reporters become unreliable and lazy due to the ease of access to information? How will they know when to distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy sources and information that is found online? Will fact checking solely exist in communications over the Internet, slowly diminishing the human element of news writing? And more importantly, how will this change the quality of stories that are produced?
Should all journalism students be required to learn the old way of putting together a news story, as in the All On Paper project at Florida Atlantic University, before they learn the new and modern ways? Will this help them understand how powerful of a tool technology, especially the Internet, is and help them not take it for granted? The professor at FAU mentioned how no one documented the process of reporting in the past, and no one is documenting the process today. Maybe we should study and use the methods of the past, in addition to those of the present.
I’ve thought about this a lot, and most of the time, I find myself wishing that the old ways of reporting were still commonplace. I like the idea of manually putting together a newspaper. It sounds fun, exciting and more productive than the constant back-and-forth email conversations I’ve had with some editors. In my opinion, generating conversation in person is more relatable and allows for a more creative atmosphere. I believe that these two things are very important in journalism and should not be lost.