Print media’s doom exaggerated

This is what Patrick Daniel said in his article in the ST a few days’ back. I must say I agree with his assessment but for different reasons. Digital and social media have carved out a big chunk of the pie and readership from print media and this is a fact. The younger generations are more comfortable with digital media and will keep fleeing the ground with a balance that will tip in favour of digital media in the long run.

On the other hand, print media has its own turf that is cut out for it. In fact both have their own audience and it is only a matter of who gets a bigger slice of the pie. The development of the two media is diverging into one that is reporting on facts and events, thanks to the political leadership, and another into more opinionated discourses and very interactive in nature. Digital and social media are going to be very personal, very emotional and with a very high rate of participation by the readers. It is a two way affair while print media is just reporting. The readers just read what the reporters reported. The reporting role is still necessary for the full time reporters to go around gathering news to report on and being paid for it.

The ST and its stable of lesser news media are doing well. According to Patrick Daniel, it is all about a commanding brand. I wonder if the brand would still be that commanding when other brands are allowed to print and sell their news. Why are there no neutral or alternative brands? Search me? In a monopolistic environment, it is elementary to gain the biggest share if not all the share of the readership and can crow about it. Where are the competitors? What would be the fate of the ST media if there are competitors? Would ST be doomed?

The print media’s shelf life has been extended. It will continue to exist for a longer time. This is a truism as digital and social media have their own limitations. When the latter becomes full fledge media with their own professional reporters, the balance would be tipped further to favour digital media. For the time being, the ST stable of news media shall rule the waves as the only media available. Just like the other monopolistic services, not making money and maintaining the market share is simply idiotic.


Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

Print media has had to change because the old revenue model based on the "monopoly" of paper no longer applies.

Anyway most media companies have embraced the electronic frontier. However, they've had to adapt, and that means cutting back on staff and investing more in IT, and doing more "cross-branding" aka "joint ventures" with non-media enterprises.

Newspapers online have audio and video media content. There's little distinction now between say, TV news network and a newspaper.

My anecdotal experience: I haven't bought a paper or a magazine for years, since e-readers and tablets came out. Electronic media is easy to annotate and clip, plus you can link everything, including your own notes -- sure beats the old days of "scrapbooking".

Anonymous said...

"Print media’s doom exaggerated"

Well! Patrick Daniel is certainly an unbiased source for such sentiments. There is no self-serving interest there.

Anonymous said...

many of the articles in shitty times are bought from reuter or agency presse overseas news, you can read their articles online real time free, newspapers are like snail mail !

Anonymous said...

they are doing well just that they moving away from their core business only !

Anonymous said...

The greatest exaggeration now is all about
the visit of a harmless bird of darkness visited the PMO Office.
Will any from that Office be leaving?

Anonymous said...

I won't mind paying to read RB's juicy posts even if sometimes got poked by the sharp corners.

b said...

Print media will gradually disappear. Kids these days are all on tablets not books.