« Hatscarfgloves | Home | Panic Mouse Motorized Cat Toy »

July 10, 2008

Blogs are dead*

1ghghyg_2

*Once they're republished on crushed dead tree matter.

Why do I say this?

Because of late I've been trying to read the Internet-originated material appearing in the New York Times (Bits, et al), Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, etc.

All these papers, circling the drain in terms of circulation and profits, are attempting to stanch** the bleeding by simply taking online material and publishing it in ink on paper.

But there's a problem: The bloggy stuff reads terribly in atoms.

There's something about stuff written for the Web that makes it suffer the equivalent of a cardiac arrest once it's reprinted on paper.

This is something the various dual-focused publishers will realize eventually — long after Elvis has left the building and it's too late.

Game_oveyr

**Cccccfdcc

July 10, 2008 at 01:01 PM | Permalink


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c5dea53ef00e553af31bc8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Blogs are dead*:

Comments

I think it boils down to the fact that hyperlinked content adds lexical richness that the printed newspaper cannot duplicate. By being able to link to existing on-line content, the words in an on-line article mean more to the reader because they are given the option of exploring the story further.

I'd like to see printed articles include QR Codes or some similar facsimile that hyperlinks content for further reading. By including this very simple printing technique, the newspaper editors will enable their readers to go from analog (newspaper) to digital (HTML) more seamlessly.

Posted by: Nikolas Schiller | Jul 21, 2008 1:04:50 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.