Twittering as a newspaper dies

You know something’s up when the men in suits come into the newsroom, especially when they are wearing expressions that you normally see on the faces of undertakers.

Now you can watch a newspaper (the Rocky Mountain News) die, online . It’s a long, lingering video, as befits the death of an institution and is quite haunting – the paper’s own website is still up there, its last act the reporting of its own demise.

However, maybe “print is here to stay for some time yet. After all, it is a fantastic interface. It’s cheap, portable, high contrast and the batteries never need recharging”

The Rocky Mountain News came to me via a twitter trail from Glamorgan student Jamie Russell who had spent the morning watching a live video stream of the Digital News Affairs (DNA) event in Brussels. Apart from the obvious questions at the event (such as how does the mainstream media survive) there was a twitteresque one: can you tell the news in 140 characters?

Jamie, and many others, twittered their contributions and saw them appear as a ‘twitterfall’ on a giant screen behind the panel of experts. I hope no other newspapers died while they were all doing this. Anyway, Jamie asked the experts if they were “looking at ways to increase retweetness“. Someone answer him, please.

Another gem that emerged from following the DNA event was that a twitter link has a life of about five minutes

My five minutes must be up, and I have surely exceeded 140 characters.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Twittering as a newspaper dies

  1. Citizen K says:

    Glorious irony!

    So classically postmodern

  2. James Stewart says:

    Nick Davies (Flat Earth News) was on Radio 4 this morning warning of the detrimental impact of the internet on newspapers (through loss of advertising) and specifically the impact on the expensive activity of investigative journalism. So the death of a newspaper and reliance on the web may not be good news. He referred to the possibility that trusts might sponsor investigative journalism – is an example in the US.

  3. rob says:

    Over the past few months various ideas have been mooted re alternative funding for the press. Some would have been unthinkable not long ago – state subsidies, endowed institutions, etc – and many have been derided. I think a long view can help here: perhaps the period of journalism being big business will turn out to a blip in history, and there will be a return to a more chequered landscape with funding coming from wider range of sources, including patronage and public money. Perhaps someone has been collating these thoughts on the web somewhere?

  4. James Stewart says:

    Some further thoughts on twittering and newsgathering at:

  5. Paul Gill says:

    Times, they are a changing. Just like they way we purchase and listen to music and the advent of email/txt communication (at the expense of the written letter), reporting the news has also changed and will no doubt continue to do so. I have massive sympathy for the newspapers, but there can be little doubt that, in the technological age, they have to adapt and change

  6. Chris says:

    I agree with Paul – Jarvis’ (slightly self indulgent) What Would Google Do? suggests numerous ways in which newspapers may do this.

  7. James Stewart says:

    In case anyone didn’t see it, this was the greatest tweet of the year so far:

  8. Hi, good post. I have been wondering about this issue,so thanks for posting.

  9. KrisBelucci says:

    Hi, good post. I have been wondering about this issue,so thanks for posting.

  10. The article is ver good. Write please more

  11. Good Day!!! is one of the most outstanding resourceful websites of its kind. I enjoy reading it every day. I will be back.

Comments are closed.