I was wondering this question today as I was contemplating the role of print media versus "real time" news. Almost everyone I know gets their news from cable TV or the internet; I get all my headline news from reliable net news sources, my weather from a compendium of sources including the local radio (weatherchannel.com tends to be less reliable for my area of the country), and my sports via yahoo! sports and espn.com.
Fortunately for us, our local paper concentrates on city and county issues, and leaves the state and national news to bigger papers. This gives it a nice little niche market, and thus, viability. But the bigger city papers are usually owned by a small number of companies, and the stories contained therein tend to be virtually identical. Why? Because they're the "canned" news stories pulled off the press wire, stripped of accountability and credit for a well written article through their anonymity. They tend to be accurate, if not always possessing of a bias, however, they're not especially timely in light of the realtime news access most of us have. Because they are "old news", they have a higher standard; something has to set them apart to make the reader WANT the newspaper.
I hope the daily newspaper doesn't fade into the sunset. But I'm seriously wondering about its viability in light of recent technological developments.
signing off,
Gideon MacLeish