Ok, well here I am with my first blog. Unfortunately, due to my memory being like a sieve, I can't recall the finer points of lecturer one, so I'm gong to start with a post about lecture two! How's that for mixing it up?
Newspapers have played a huge role in the collection and distribution of news almost since their inception. They provide a relatively cheap, easy and quick way for a large number of people to find information that interests them. However, this convenience has usually entailed a small fee. With the advent of the intenet, the ordinary person was sudeenly bombarded with a wealth of eclectic, and free, information from the comfort of their own homes, which predictably led to the steady decline of newspaper sales. Now, collecting news isn't particularly cheap, so news agencies had to find a new way to recoup costs, namely, moving their product to the net, with an additional subscription fee applied.
Fair enough, you would think. But suprisingly, many people have had a big problem with news agencies such as the New York Times and The Australian charging people for their service, as they beleive that information on the internet should be free, no matter the situation. This is obviously an unrealistic desire, and in my opinion companies that provide us with quality news should not be begrudged trying to make a profit, simply because their content is online. After all, we paid for it happily enough before did we not? Add to that the fact that the online subscriptioin fee is much cheap than buying a printed paper every day, and we are left with the realisation that we do, in fact, have it pretty good.
No comments:
Post a Comment