newspaper vs. radio

[NicePete]

I am 33. My undergraduate degree is in journalism. My mother was a newspaper reporter and editor. I worked on school papers from Junior High through graduate school (edited the paper in law school). Yet these days I rely on newspapers to provide very little of my information. Why?

Two main reasons: the quality of most local papers has gone to hell and the internet is available as a more thorough and versatile news-gathering tool.

Of course, I read my rural community's twice weekly paper faithfully for local news. But, the big dailies from around here, I scan once or twice a week. Nothing in 'em. And I read the Sunday paper.

Also, after being (mis)quoted a couple of times, my faith in print journalists' fabled devotion to accuracy was severely shaken.

------------------
"Owls will deafen us with their incessant hooting!" W. Smithers

[StrTrkr777]

I am 30. The paper contains many things that I am not interested in. I do not need to read the sports section, all I need is the Braves score. I do not need the living section or the personals. If I want a movie listing I go to the Internet. If I want news I either listen to the radio or I go to the Internet.

Besides, newspapers cost money, the radio does not. Also, if I read the paper at work, I am considered goofing off, but if I am at the keyboard I must be working away.

Perception is reality.

Jeffery

Oh, newspapers--love 'em, feel antsy if I can't see one every day. When I travel, I like to get the local paper to get the "feel" of that town or country.

I can skip over the things in the paper I don't care about (ads, sports, local business), and I can clip interesting or funny articles to send to friends--try doing that with a radio!

That having been said, I do rely on the radio in the morning to tell me the weather & traffic . . .

[According to Pliny]

I'm 36. I spend my lunch hour everyday with the LA Times, and about one and a half hours listening to NPR news while I drive to and from work.

My problem is that I can't find any decent alternatives to either of these sources. No other newspaper I've seen could replace the LA Times and NPR certainly doesn't have any worthy rivals on radio.

If there's a breaking news story, though, there's no substitute for CNN on the tube.

[kellibelli]

now this is interesting...the paper I work at is running scared from the internet...
but at the same time, you cant take the computer to the john to read on the throne either. I love to read...I savour each word, and if I want I can go back and re-savour the words.but I have the radio going all the time at my desk, in my car, and at home...
************************************
If newspapers had more____________and less_________, I would read them more.
anyone?

[StrTrkr777]

Common now Kelli, this is the Jerry Springer society. The answer to your question "If newspapers had more____________and less_________, I would read them more" would be more sex and less news.

In reality, why shy away from the Internet? You can print the news stories that you like and take them to the john and send them either on paper or electronically to friends.

Jeffery

[kellibelli]

where was my head?
in a few years, they will make computer desks with a toilet built into the seat!

nice idea though about the sex.

[StrTrkr777]

Actually, they will put computer workstations in the toilet, so that workers can be the most productive.

Jeffery

[kellibelli]

man we lost the topic fast...
ok, you cant smack a dog on the ass with a rolled up computer!
so there!

[Doctor Jackson]

I like them all - TV, radio, newspapers. I like to think that by getting my news from all possible sources that I am more able to weed out the various slants and get the truth. Nothing like getting the same story from a conservative radio show and a liberal newspaper (or vice versa).

------------------
The overwhelming majority of people have more than the average (mean) number of legs. -- E. Grebenik

[GLWasteful]

I'm 33. I listen to NPR and pretty much nothing else. Occasionally, I listen to commercial radio, but I find the ads annoying.

I gave up reading the newspaper when I started my new job a year ago. I still read the Sunday paper occasionally, but not too terribly often. I also read The New York Times on the web, though. If, however, I find myself in another location, then I will buy the local newspaper. See things through someone else's lens, I suppose.

That said, though, I'm sitting here at work and listening to CDs. Science Friday on NPR makes my eyes glaze over.

Waste
Flick Lives!

[kellibelli]

what is npr?

[According to Pliny]

NPR is National Public Radio. They broadcast "Morning Edition" in the morning and "All Things Considered" in the afternoon. These are without a doubt the best news programs on American radio. Between these shows you can also hear some great interview and magazine shows like "Talk of the Nation", "Air Talk", "The World" and "Monitor Radio"(A radio version of the Christian Science Monitor).

[Dirty Devil]

I'm 28. I grew up in San Francisco and read both the Chronicle and Examiner for years (yeah, yeah, I've heard it all, so no jokes about either tabloid, I mean newspaper, please). I stopped for the simple reason that they depressed me too much. Reading about the trials, troubles and injustices in the world day after day after day...it just got to be too much. Almost all of the news on the radio, except for NPR (National Public Radio), is very skimpy compared to the paper. It's mostly the highlights of the highlights.

If I'm interested in a current event, I will almost always read a newspaper. Something about it being in print, physically in front of me, gives me a little more faith in the accuracy of what I'm being told. Why, I don't know. Just the way I feel.

[Gaudere]

I love NPR (although they repeat programming every 8-12 hours, which is annoying during a long day) But I'd rather read than listen to the radio. I can get info a heckuva lot faster if I read than if I'm just listening. I can pick and choose what I want to read, skim or read in depth. I prefer newspapers to the net if I just want a general idea of the latest news, but if I want something specific I'll use the net. Besides, there's just *something* about holding the newspaper in your hand that you don't get from staring at a screen (aside from the much better typography, as well).

I would read newspapers more if they went into more depth on big topics, and less coverage for "cat rescued from tree".

------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

[Fretful Porpentine]

I'm 23, and I absolutely could not live without the paper. Wish I could, because the local rag (Raleigh News & Observer) isn't worth the price of a subscription, but I feel unfulfilled if I don't have anything to read at breakfast.

As far as I'm concerned, the radio is for music and the TV is primarily for collecting dust.

I think every city should have, in addition to a respectible newspaper, a trashy tabloid, "for those who like to read fast or have to read slow." In New York we have the Post and the News, who compete every day with lurid, screaming headlines like COP SLAY SHOCK: NARC BOMB LOVE LINK!! I am not making that one up, either, it was one of my faves (right up there with the classic HEADLESS BODY IN TOPLESS BAR!!).

Sad thing, though, is New York used to have half-a-dozen respectible papers, and now we're down to just the Times, which, with no competition, is not what it used to be . . .

[GLWasteful]

Also, NPR here in the local market (KCMO) carries As It Happens in the early evening. Which ties into Canada.

And between 3-5 (at least I think it's 3-5) AM it carries some damn thing or another from The UK that's a Jeopardy type game show, but with questions that are really hard. Brings me down to size when a little old lady described as an orchid freak kicks my sorry butt. Although, to my credit, if I'm up and listening it's because I've been out drinking.

Waste
Flick Lives!

[tracer]

No soap, radio!

[gary horaczek]

I'm 39 and holding (like Jack Benny). For the latest news I listen to the radio (although you didn't ask TV too) but when I want more details I read the newspaper ( once I can get myself past the Sunshine girl on page 3).

------------------
garyh

[David B]

I gotta vote for the newspaper, for many reasons.

1) No commercials. I've pretty much stopped listening to radio 'cus I'm sick of commercials (the same ones over and over) and DJs who think they're far more clever than they actually are. I listen to tapes now.

2) For news, all you get on most radio news is a soundbite. Maybe a quote. Whoopee. I want something I can read, check out, etc. I also want something I can quote later, should it be necessary. It's too easy to mis-hear (or just miss) something on the radio, and then you can't go back and check it again.

3) I can pick up and put down a newspaper as I have time. The radio news is either on or it's not. It revolves around their time schedule, not mine.

4) I get paid (not much, but a little) to write freelance newspaper book reviews. Nobody on the radio has yet offered me money (even a little bit).

[Persephone]

I'm 32. I'm an MSNBC junkie. But there's a reason why I got hooked on it, really there is...
I used to read the newspaper, but then I moved to a different city. My current city (Flint, MI) has a pretty sucky paper. I read it from time to time, but only for a couple of excellent columnists & Ann Landers. We used to have NPR here, too. A very good station, WFBE. My husband's band played live on it more than once. I must add that FBE stands for Flint Board of Education. Well, those losers decided that they needed money, so they sold their ownership of the bandwidth. It was within commercial bandwidth, you see. Now it's a country station...one of about a dozen here in this area. Sigh. I turned to MSNBC out of desperation.

[kellibelli]

which is better and why....no quotes please, I really want just your opinions.

I personally feel that advertisements on tv and radio are annoying, they interrupt the enjoyment of the program, often causing me to change the channel...making the point of the ad obsoleet(sp?)..in the paper, I can read what I want without the interuption of the ads...these I look at only if I want to.

what are your feelings on this?
What about the content of radion nowadays as opposed to ten years ago, What about the newspaper content?

[StrTrkr777]

Personally, radio.

I can either listen to the ads, ignore them or change the channel. I seldom have the time to sit and read a paper. But I listen to talk/news radio on the way to and from work. So I get plenty of news that way.

Jeffery

[Jahender]

I have to go with the radio, where else can you hit a few buttons and get your choice of Smokey Robinson, the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Imus, NPR, Howard Stern, how to fix an appliance, what web sites suck, quasi-help from an annoying bitch Dr. Laura, one-sided political views from a fat Rush Limbaugh, and two guys and their callers talking about the fact the the Detroit Tigers and Lions SUCK EVERY FUCKING YEAR!!!!

Variety baby, it's the spice of life.

------------------
The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it.
George Bernard Shaw

[kellibelli]

interesting...you say you dont have time?
but yet you have time for this...

how old are you?

apparently there is a 'lost audience' that newspapers are not reaching...the demographics say around 30 years old I believe...grew up on MTV, fast food, etc, and we dont take the time to read like our parents did.Dont have the attention span some would say.

Please include your age in your replies...it may show a pattern

[kellibelli]

Good Monday morning to you all...hope your weekend was as good as mine

Fretfull...interesting...you reflect the other demographic, people in the late teens to mid twenties are reading.

For me, I like being able to go back and scrutinize the info...on the radio, or tv for that matter, the info goes by so quick, you blink/sneeze, you've missed it!

David, good points there...

Any thoughts on the future of newspapers?

[JoeBlank]

30 and register my vote for newspapers. As others have said, you can read at your leisure, read what you want and disregard the rest, skip ads that don't interest you, and take it to the john. Both tv and radio news are pitiful, even in depth reporting can't compete with a good newspaper article. I will agree that for breaking news you can't beat CNN. And I agree with Papa about NPR. Just started a new job with a longer commute, and when I'm not listening to a book on tape I'm tuned to NPR. Only station that has ever caused me to sit in the car in the garage to hear the end of a story. Maybe this is because the stories are interesting and actually last longer that 30 seconds.

[LongHrn99]

I'm 17. Newspapers all the way. Radio news sucks because if you listen to news or talk radio you have to listen to the opinions of others. If I want to read opinions I go to the viewpoints area of my newspaper. And if some guy writes a crappy article I can blow off some steam in the Letters to the Editor section. On radio I have no option like this. Plus it's a soundbyte and a two sentence report on the radio, while newspapers are infintely more in depth. And like David said, it's too easy to mis-hear a comment or quote.

[Manda JO]

As soon as they find a way to broadcast my daily crossword puzzle. . .

To me, the best thing going on NPR is Washington Press Corp. It's so novel to here a political figure talk for an hour--neither newspapers or regular radio news give people this kind of oppertunity to fill in the soundbites.

I love my paper, but I have a problem. I feel guilty if I throw them away, but I don't know where there is a nearby recycling drop off. My car is fast becoming a fire trap.

[kknick34]

I'm 35 and it's newspapers all the way. I read two every day (wall street journal & daily herald - Chicago burbs paper.)

Whenever I'm out of town I always by a local paper. Once in Jamacia I paid $5 for a day old USA Today, because I'd gone 4 days without one and was going crazy.

[DianneCar]

At 32, I'm an NPR junkie: I must hear it for 2 hours at least each day. I also subscribe to the local paper both at home and at my business. But honestly? I read the Sunday paper by about Wednesday and I read the local section and the first section of the daily paper(beyond the front page) about every two or three days. I feel guilty about this: I know I *should* read more of it and read it more carefully but time is short and they don't offer me much of anything I can't get on public radio, which I can do while I do something else. I almost *never* watch TV news.

We're blessed in this part of the world: we have 2 public radio stations. One's classical music plus morning and evening news (WHRO) but the other (WHRV)is all news and information. We get Morning Edition, Christopher Liden's "The Connection," Terri Gross' "Fresh Air," Ray Suarez' "Talk of the Nation", the Nat'l Press Club, the Chatauqua Institution's lecture series, Clay Jenkinson's "The Thomas Jefferson Hour," Car Talk, Whaddya Know, The Environment Show, The Public Radio Health Show, Latino USA, Beyond Computers and a bunch of other stuff. It's a rich cultural resource.

I do love my crossword, however. Radio can't do that.

[the first supraliminal]

I'm 29. I always felt the newspaper was cumbersome. I'd read an interesting article on the front page, only to find it is continued on page A6. I try to flip to A6 and the whole thing falls apart. And when I finally get to A6, there are so many continued articles with brief and similar titles that I can't find which one I was reading. And when I do find it, I lost my train of thought anyway. So I have to go back to the front page and figure out the exact title, while the whole thing falls apart even more. Gigantic huge paper, why can't they find a new format?

How do you guys feel about news magazines? I like US News. I prefer user-friendly medium.



------------------
¾È ³ç, ÁÖ µ¿ ÀÏ

[copy ed]

Age 46, former newpaper reporter and copy editor (now a freelance copy editor):

I agree with David B on most points. Newspapers rule, but NPR when on the road.

As for national news coverage: At one of my older newpaper jobs, I used to see the radio news and the print news headlines arrive. The radio news had most the major items of the print new report, except only the first paragraph or two. Now most radio news just makes me want "the rest of the story."

As for local coverage, the local radio stations used to read the first graph or two of my paper's local stories over the air, paraphrased. We knew it was true because any mistakes in articles were repeated.

It's a pretty superficial way to get your news. NPR is the exception. But you can't put it in your briefcase and open it any time you want it to the issue you wanted. And the ads and mindless filler chatter on commercial radio drive me NUTS.