The Philippine Star had an article last July 28 (Saturday) titled “Growing trees in a digital forest” which includes my views on print and online publications.  If you’re interested in media studies, I think this article is worth reading.

Due to space constraints and other considerations, I expected that not all of my points can be included by the author. In this light, allow me to post the full text of my emailed reply to his questions.

In your opinion, how has the Internet – specifically online news – affected newspapers?

New media (particularly the Internet) give media consumers an option to retrieve information faster. Unlike print media where information is bound by time and space constraints, new media can provide more up-to-date developments of issues and concerns. While there are technical limitations with regard to data storage and transfer in the case of websites, it cannot be denied that these can be easily remedied in case new media organizations face these problems. A simple deletion, for example, of selected archived files can help free up space. In the print media, deadlines cannot be compromised as these could result in delays in production. Should print media organizations also decide to add more pages to accommodate stories, they have to deal with higher printing cost, among others. New media organizations generally do not have to deal with such constraints. Unlike in print media where there are specific deadlines that must be met, new media have what we refer to as a “24/7” deadline because new developments can be reported as soon as the stories are written. 

Do newspapers, physical ink and paper documents, still have a place in the near future?

I think it is wrong to assume that we are now seeing the death of print media, particularly newspapers, with the so-called ubiquity of new media. The main attribute of print media which is “permanence” has not been compromised by new media. Print media like newspapers, magazines and books are still used as main references despite the availability of online sources. One must keep in mind that there is still a limited reach of the Internet and there are data to prove this argument. For more information, please read my article titled “The Practice of Online Journalism in the Philippines: Personal Observations” which may be retrieved from http://bulatlat.com/news/6-36/6-36-online.htm.

Is there a general decline in newspaper readership since the Internet was introduced? Or is it safer to say that there are other factors contributing either to a decline or increase in newspaper readership?

Studies in the U.S. show a decline in newspaper readership due to the general tendency of media consumers to just surf the Internet for their information needs. In the Philippines, one can also notice that television is the most powerful medium right now, with newspapers being the least credible, according to a 2004 survey by Pulse Asia. A close scrutiny of the Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey (FLEMMS) shows that Filipinos have the least access to print media. Unlike in the U.S., however, I think newspaper readership is low in the Philippines simply because of the high cost of broadsheets. Those earning low wages would rather watch television or listen to the radio instead of buy newspapers that cost almost P20. I think the Internet which was introduced to Filipinos in 1994 had little to do with the decline in newspaper readership for the simple reason that there still remains a limited reach of new media. I would concede, however, that those with relatively high purchasing power are wont to just surf the Internet for their information needs, in the same way that the techno-savvy overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) deployed to industrialized countries normally go to various websites to be abreast with the goings-on in the country. This, however, is not the case with the poor majority living in the country.

Do these two media (newspaper and the Internet) really complement each other? Or is it the other way around?

I think the print and new media complement each other in the sense that websites of print media organizations can help increase interest in print publications which could result in more profits for the company. The new media component (e.g., website, WAPsite) can ensure that information reach a broader, global audience. On the other hand, the authority of print media can help increase the credibility of online publications. The websites of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) and Newsbreak, for example, are seen as authoritative because of the organizations’ journalistic outputs in the so-called “old media.” I think the same case applies to websites of newspapers like the Philippine Star where the reputation of print publications tends to rub off on the websites. In the case of Bulatlat Online Magazine where I serve as an editor and which does not have a print counterpart, I think the decision of several print publications (e.g., Philippine Star, Philippine Graphic, Manila
Times) to quote from our studies or even reprint some of our articles helped increase the credibility of our website. In this way, complementation between the two is also achieved.

Personally, which do you prefer and why? Do you think this represents a general viewpoint of the average Filipino news reader?

Print has the advantage of permanence; radio, immediacy; television, audio-visual components; and new media, convergence. As a journalist who straddles print, broadcast and new media, I think one should not be asked to choose one for the other since all forms of media have their own attributes and advantages. The temptation to say that new media is the best is borne out of its being the newest form of media. Some media analysts had the same mindset when television was introduced, and there was even a song about it (“Video Killed the Radio Star” by The Buggles). I think the “average Filipino news reader,” based on various studies, identify television as the most powerful medium, leading observers to note that we are now living in the “TV generation.” However, being the most powerful does not translate to its being the best medium. All forms of media complement each other and it would be irresponsible for us to pit one against the other.