Can Traditional Media Survive?

As the media landscape continues to change, and marketers shift more and more of their monies into new media, there are those who predict that some traditional media, like TV and newspapers, may not survive - at least in their present forms. Do you think this is an accurate statement? Why or or why not? Provide examples to support your position.

When I first read this question, my initial response was that traditional media is still – and will always be - relevant. Thinking of it the same way people must have thought in the 1950s, when television first entered households across America, the thought must have been then that ‘this was the end’ of the newspaper and news magazines. Or more recently, with the popularity of e-books vs. traditional books and libraries. The idea that libraries, television and newspapers/magazines will disappear seems not even fathomable to me. We live in an ever evolving society, and with that, comes changes.
I began to scour the internet to do some research. I came across a State of the Media Annual Report - I had never heard of this before – it is compiled by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. I began to look at the statistics provided, the concrete examples. Here’s what the report stated in the 2013 overview:
Signs of the shrinking reporting power are documented throughout this year’s report. Estimates for newspaper newsroom cutbacks in 2012 put the industry down 30% since 2000 and below 40,000 full-time professional employees for the first time since 1978. In local TV, our special content report reveals, sports, weather and traffic now account on average for 40% of the content produced on the newscasts studied while story lengths shrink. On CNN, the cable channel that has branded itself around deep reporting, produced story packages were cut nearly in half from 2007 to 2012. Across the three cable channels, coverage of live events and live reports during the day, which often require a crew and correspondent, fell 30% from 2007 to 2012 while interview segments, which tend to take fewer resources and can be scheduled in advance, were up 31%. Time magazine, the only major print news weekly left standing, cut roughly 5% of its staff in early 2013 as a part of broader company layoffs. And in African-American news media, the Chicago Defender has winnowed its editorial staff to just four while The Afro cut back the number of pages in its papers from 28-32 in 2008 to around 16-20 in 2012. A growing list of media outlets, such as Forbes magazine, use technology by a company called Narrative Science to produce content by way of algorithm, no human reporting necessary. And some of the newer nonprofit entrants into the industry, such as the Chicago News Cooperative, have, after launching with much fanfare, shut their doors.
And so yes, it seems as if traditional media is changing. Although television seems to be keeping current, by incorporating social media and other online marketing tools into their programs. “Tweet us your pictures!” “Follow us online.” “Vote on our website!” “For more information, log on to www….”. Televisions seems to have fully embraced online marketing and I believe it’s here to stay.
What I have observed about traditional marketing on television this week – while watching the Olympics, or during last night’s Dance Moms (don’t judge me, I have tween girls) is that in traditional marketing - in this instance, television, products and messages are forced upon us as consumers. We are held captive just as something good is about to happen on the program we are watching. It’s usually the time used for me to clear the dishes, or do another small chore. Rarely do I pay attention. If I’m not interested, I tend to “turn off” the commercials (on the flip side, my kids can repeat word-for-word almost every commercial out there). With social media or online advertisements, the choice is up to me. I, as the consumer, choose whether or not to participate. I choose to click for further information if I am interested and if I have the time. There is something really nice about that.
Belch and Belch says “The growth of the Internet and online services is another factor that may erode traditional print version newspaper readership. As penetration of the Internet into households increase, newspapers and magazines are among the most threatened of the major media.” (Belch & Belch, 2012, p. 440)
As a solution to this, newspapers and magazines are now often also offered to subscribers online. I, for one, prefer to get my news like this. I no longer look at the NYTimes in paper form, unless my child/ren have to cut an actual newspaper clipping for a current events project at school. Otherwise, I view the NYTimes on my iPhone and computer at some point in the early morning. I have limited the number of magazines I still get in paper form through a subscription (to me, there is nothing like opening my mailbox and finding that month’s Real Simple issue inside). I have been a subscriber for years, and plan to continue. I devour each page.
On a personal level, I still get that “big brother is watching” feeling when I start seeing advertisements on my web searches that apply to something I may have Googled earlier in the day or week. So I am really torn – traditional vs online marketing? Both are here to stay for now. But how do we define traditional? For today’s youngest generation, all this will be ancient history. I am reminded of that when the director of technology at my youngest daughter’s school tells the new parents at the start of every school year, “we are preparing your children for jobs that don’t even exist yet.”
We live in an ever-changing world and marketing is not immune to this. I believe marketers need to find the balance between the traditional and the new and incorporate technology into the mix in order to produce optimal results.

http://stateofthemedia.org/2013 retrieved on February 12, 2014
Belch, G., & Belch, M. (2012). Advertising and promotion: An integrated marketing communications perspective. (9th ed ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.