The Washington Post's media reporter has joined the ranks of those who fear the imminent demise of journalism. I don't share this outlook. In fact, I see journalism--and science journalism in particular--on the edge of transformation and renewal, but more on this over the coming weeks.
In the meantime, consider what Howard Kurtz has to offer in his column today.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Correction: My post a few days ago implied implied that the Washington Post celebrated Gore's Nobel by publishing four items repeating the falsehood that a judge found nine errors in the movie. This was wrong. I missed their editorial on the Nobel Prize where they also took a swipe at Gore:
His…
Illustration by David Parkins, Nature
Today, Nature released a news feature by Geoff Brumfiel on the downturn in mainstream science media. We've all known that this is happening; the alarms become impossible to ignore when Peter Dysktra and his team at CNN lost their jobs last year. For mainstream…
The Washington Post is facing criticism after refusing to issue a correction for an erroneous statistic cited by Op-Ed columnist George Will's column topic—that global sea ice levels are the same as they were in 1979. The statistic was summoned to support his column's viewpoint that global warming…
I last left this blog on an ambiguous note. Followed by another unannounced absence, this might have seemed strangely ironic. It was for me--that post was written the day before my Thanksgiving break, and I had absolutely nothing planned--except to write. That, as you might have guessed, is exactly…
No, he does not see a demise of journalism. He notices the demise of newspapers. That is an important distinction. This is just one of many responses to Kurtz.