Comments on: Old Media vs. New Media: Battle to the death?

By: Old media x New media | marianajourn65

Old media x New media | marianajourn65 — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:25:11 +0000

[...] time they have more ability to work with new media. According to the website old media new tricks, (http://www.oldmedianewtricks.com/old-media-vs-new-media-battle-to-the-death/), the media landscape continues to change but that doesn’t mean it’s a fight –to- the- death [...]

By: Old Media VS New Media « Alcestiseshtemoa's Blog

Old Media VS New Media « Alcestiseshtemoa's Blog — Sun, 19 Sep 2010 05:59:23 +0000

[...] September 19, 2010 http://www.oldmedianewtricks.com/old-media-vs-new-media-battle-to-the-death/ [...]

By: Episode 49: Double Rainbow | What's the Rumpus?

Episode 49: Double Rainbow | What's the Rumpus? — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:01:45 +0000

[...] Old Media vs. New Media: Battle to the death? | Old Media, New Tricks [...]

By: Joseph Pelletier

Joseph Pelletier — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:55:58 +0000

And keep in mind that New Media and Old Media aren't fighting, in fact, most news sources make great use of their websites (notably CNN) to break into developing stories. The vast majority of news sources have done a superb job of breaking into a New Media style--the real problem, as we all know, is financial. News sources definitely have not received the credit they deserve in terms of journalism in 2009, and with less and less money coming in.

I'm not worried so much about verified and gossiped news, because that has always been around. And as the saying goes, the cream always rises to the top. The great news outlets make their name from quality journalism. The TMZ's of journalism do not.

Whether we can keep those quality news sources afloat, however, is the real problem.

By: John Tedesco» Blog Archive » Today’s blog roundup

John Tedesco» Blog Archive » Today’s blog roundup — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:13:19 +0000

[...] Olive: Newspapers are boring themselves to death. Old Media, New Tricks: It doesn’t have to be a battle to the death between old and new media. Share and [...]

By: edwardboches

edwardboches — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 01:56:18 +0000

Dan,
True they need to stay relevant. (They're all going out of business soon in the new era of free content.) It's the newspaper and magazines that have the toughest time. The model of print is broken and consumers prefer to be their own editors (google reader, et.al.), which is all good. But as a consumer, I still want the quality of the NY Times and the New Yorker. Your blog and many others are great, along with YouTube and other content platforms. But the quality of content will never be the same. Unless you can get Malcolm Gladwell to write for you.

By: dan360man

dan360man — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:39:06 +0000

IMHO, old media may have all the credibility in the world, but needs to earn street cred in the new media landscape if it is to remain relevant.

Just my two cents.

By: edwardboches

edwardboches — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 02:15:26 +0000

This is an argument for argument sake. Old media has the creds, fact checking and objectivity to avoid rumors and hearsay. New media has the alacrity, but often not the accuracy. Some newspapers are using them both together. The Boston Globe has embedded Twitter in many of its online pages, for example. It's an easy way for old media to let new media go hand in hand, side by side. I for one love the instantaneous content of new media, but want the reliability of old.

By: Robert Quigley

Robert Quigley — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:59:30 +0000

Now now .. remember, it's not a battle to the death

By: dan360man

dan360man — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:13:55 +0000

I wonder if it would just be easier to buy up the better blogs…? They can't be valued at much, anyway.