Newspapers are going broke. Colorado's Rocky Mountain News was the latest paper of note to close recently and industry pundits say more papers will certainly follow. Is it because the internet has supplanted them as a trusted source of information? Are that many people getting their news on- line these days? Well the answers are yes and no.
Take Cambodia. People wouldn't know an on-line newspaper if they saw one here because of course, most folks haven't. There are 15 million people in Cambodia and some 40,000 use the internet occasionally. Many younger people start blogs but they don't keep them up because internet time at an internet shop costs as much as 75 cents an hour. Broadband costs over $150 per month but 40% of Cambodians exist on less than $.50 (50 cents) per day.
Squeezing youtube out of the internet is virtually impossible on a consistent basis but people still have a vital need for news. Multi-media won't work here as a source of information to the masses and neither will the internet. Since President Hun Sen controls the content seen on TV news, NEWSPAPERS are more important than ever. Given that only 20% of Cambodia's populace has access to power and no power means no internet or TV, well, you can do the math.
All this means is that people read newspapers everyday (those that can read anyway…..50% of the female population here can't). It's much of the same throughout the region. People read newspapers in China everyday as well. About 900 million people living in "modern day" China are still awaiting the effects of the nation's "new found wealth" to trickle down to them. Fifty million people in Myanmar need newspapers that tell them the truth. (The government takes screen captures of your internet screen every two minutes there).
There is a combined population of 150 million people in Thailand and Vietnam. Thailand has had four or five (I have lost count) presidents within the last couple of years and press freedom is low.
The 2007 Worldwide Press Freedom Index reports that Thailand ranked 135th out of 169 countries listed. Other rankings include: Laos, 161 Vietnam, 162, China 163 and Burma (Myanmar) 164. If these nations don't have a need for good newspapers, I don't who does.
It's the same elsewhere. In Iran a couple of years ago, over 100 newspapers were shut down not because people weren't reading them but because THEY WERE READING THEM! The same happens right here in Cambodia.
In fact, in a recent article on The New Republic website, (yea I read news on the net as well as on paper) an interesting point was made:
"The World Bank produces an annual index of political corruption around the world, based on surveys of people who do business in each country. In a
study published in 2003 in The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Alicia Adsera, Carles Boix, and Mark Payne examine the relationship between corruption and "free circulation of daily newspapers per person" (a measure of both news circulation and freedom of the press).
Controlling for economic development, type of legal system, and other
factors, they find a very strong association: the lower the free circulation of newspapers in a country, the higher it stands on the corruption index. Using different measures, they also find a similar relationship across states within the United States: the lower the news circulation, the greater the corruption. Another analysis published in 2006, a historical account by the economists Matthew Gentzkow, Edward L. Glaeser, and Claudia Goldin, suggests that the growth of a more information-oriented press may have been a factor in reducing government corruption in the United States between the
Gilded Age and the Progressive Era."
Cambodia ranked 162nd on Transparency International's 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) out of 179 countries listed. Other rankings: Iran 131, Laos 168, Myanmar 179.
The point of all of his is to state that the death knell for newspapers is vastly overstated. True, models for news distribution are changing in the western world but that world tends to be inward looking,
When these developers decide on new aggregation models they should also think about how recent events could hold them back in the future.
Take the case of Microsoft in China. The Chinese government asked the firm to block certain functionality related to the search terms available to Chinese citizens on the net. Apparently, the government didn't want them to find terms such as "political prisoners in China" etc.
Microsoft stood to loose lots of money if their product was banned in China so they caved in to the government and reconfigured their program to meet Chinese governmental demands. So you see folks, even if developing nations begin to bridge the digital divide, their sources of on-line information may be altered.
Microsoft should treat such requests as mentioned above as others have treated issues of child labor and given China full functionality or walked away from the deal. Walking away would have enabled truth seeking Chinese journalists to strive to develop a free press as a whole. Once these seeds had taken root, Microsoft cold have stepped back in and enjoyed even more demand for their on-line products.
Computer makers are getting into the portable music space, selling movies and becoming dominant players in the cell phone arena. The problem is that currently only about 1 billion of the world's inhabitants have the wherewithal to participate. Come on out here and see how many Gameboys you see in a week. There are probably more in your house. As The New Republic article point out, "the falling costs of computers and communication have "placed the material means of information and cultural production in the hands of a significant fraction of the world's population--on the order of a billion people around the globe."
So what about the other 5.7 billion people on the planet? What means of information will they rely on? Well, for those with electricity, TV, radio, and newspapers. And those without electricity? Newspapers are somewhat important, don't you think?
John Brown Photojournalist On LIGHTSTALKERS
My Mondo Library Photographs
My Photoshelter Archive Homepage
GAIA Photojournalism Collective
Take Cambodia. People wouldn't know an on-line newspaper if they saw one here because of course, most folks haven't. There are 15 million people in Cambodia and some 40,000 use the internet occasionally. Many younger people start blogs but they don't keep them up because internet time at an internet shop costs as much as 75 cents an hour. Broadband costs over $150 per month but 40% of Cambodians exist on less than $.50 (50 cents) per day.
Squeezing youtube out of the internet is virtually impossible on a consistent basis but people still have a vital need for news. Multi-media won't work here as a source of information to the masses and neither will the internet. Since President Hun Sen controls the content seen on TV news, NEWSPAPERS are more important than ever. Given that only 20% of Cambodia's populace has access to power and no power means no internet or TV, well, you can do the math.
All this means is that people read newspapers everyday (those that can read anyway…..50% of the female population here can't). It's much of the same throughout the region. People read newspapers in China everyday as well. About 900 million people living in "modern day" China are still awaiting the effects of the nation's "new found wealth" to trickle down to them. Fifty million people in Myanmar need newspapers that tell them the truth. (The government takes screen captures of your internet screen every two minutes there).
There is a combined population of 150 million people in Thailand and Vietnam. Thailand has had four or five (I have lost count) presidents within the last couple of years and press freedom is low.
The 2007 Worldwide Press Freedom Index reports that Thailand ranked 135th out of 169 countries listed. Other rankings include: Laos, 161 Vietnam, 162, China 163 and Burma (Myanmar) 164. If these nations don't have a need for good newspapers, I don't who does.
It's the same elsewhere. In Iran a couple of years ago, over 100 newspapers were shut down not because people weren't reading them but because THEY WERE READING THEM! The same happens right here in Cambodia.
In fact, in a recent article on The New Republic website, (yea I read news on the net as well as on paper) an interesting point was made:
"The World Bank produces an annual index of political corruption around the world, based on surveys of people who do business in each country. In a
study published in 2003 in The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Alicia Adsera, Carles Boix, and Mark Payne examine the relationship between corruption and "free circulation of daily newspapers per person" (a measure of both news circulation and freedom of the press).
Controlling for economic development, type of legal system, and other
factors, they find a very strong association: the lower the free circulation of newspapers in a country, the higher it stands on the corruption index. Using different measures, they also find a similar relationship across states within the United States: the lower the news circulation, the greater the corruption. Another analysis published in 2006, a historical account by the economists Matthew Gentzkow, Edward L. Glaeser, and Claudia Goldin, suggests that the growth of a more information-oriented press may have been a factor in reducing government corruption in the United States between the
Gilded Age and the Progressive Era."
Cambodia ranked 162nd on Transparency International's 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) out of 179 countries listed. Other rankings: Iran 131, Laos 168, Myanmar 179.
The point of all of his is to state that the death knell for newspapers is vastly overstated. True, models for news distribution are changing in the western world but that world tends to be inward looking,
When these developers decide on new aggregation models they should also think about how recent events could hold them back in the future.
Take the case of Microsoft in China. The Chinese government asked the firm to block certain functionality related to the search terms available to Chinese citizens on the net. Apparently, the government didn't want them to find terms such as "political prisoners in China" etc.
Microsoft stood to loose lots of money if their product was banned in China so they caved in to the government and reconfigured their program to meet Chinese governmental demands. So you see folks, even if developing nations begin to bridge the digital divide, their sources of on-line information may be altered.
Microsoft should treat such requests as mentioned above as others have treated issues of child labor and given China full functionality or walked away from the deal. Walking away would have enabled truth seeking Chinese journalists to strive to develop a free press as a whole. Once these seeds had taken root, Microsoft cold have stepped back in and enjoyed even more demand for their on-line products.
Computer makers are getting into the portable music space, selling movies and becoming dominant players in the cell phone arena. The problem is that currently only about 1 billion of the world's inhabitants have the wherewithal to participate. Come on out here and see how many Gameboys you see in a week. There are probably more in your house. As The New Republic article point out, "the falling costs of computers and communication have "placed the material means of information and cultural production in the hands of a significant fraction of the world's population--on the order of a billion people around the globe."
So what about the other 5.7 billion people on the planet? What means of information will they rely on? Well, for those with electricity, TV, radio, and newspapers. And those without electricity? Newspapers are somewhat important, don't you think?
John Brown Photojournalist On LIGHTSTALKERS
My Mondo Library Photographs
My Photoshelter Archive Homepage
GAIA Photojournalism Collective
No comments:
Post a Comment