Death of Newspapers Again Disputed

Are newspapers dead? Here we go again...

Until pixels do totally replace ink, this will be a valid question and dinosaurs like me will continue to say "No" and present reasons why. Certainly they need to evolve, but there are some characteristics they should maintain as they do.

One such characteristic was brought to light by Tim Giago, founder of the Native American Journalists Association. He writes in Huffington Post that the newspaper's demise is indeed linked to the Internet, but he blames the fact that newspapers have lost touch with their communities far more. Weeklies in small, rural communities continue to do well because they maintain their connection to the communities they serve, he writes.

This community connection--the way a news organization can and should weave itself into the fabric of the community it serves--must never be lost. That's one sure way for newspapers to die.

I recently came across an edition of a newspaper that I cared about deeply at one point in my life (and, thanks to journalism school and my work for Inland Press Association, there are many). I didn't know whether to be disgusted or sad. It was clear the newspaper had lost its connection to the community. The news seemed obligatory. Real people were absent. I found nothing in the pages that made the newspaper unique or helped define its community. For the first time ever, I felt I wasted my money on a newspaper.

In whatever form (print or online) a publication takes, its connection to the audience starts with relevance--making the news essential to the people who read it. I still see too many newspapers ignoring these crucial questions:

• Who is the audience?
  
• What do they want?
  
• What form do they want these things in?

This seems as good a place to start as any for newspapers that have lost their way.