RC -3

CAT 2020  PREP  online   

FRESH BATCHES STARTING IN AUGUST!

CONTACT NOW!

Whatsapp 09674548313!

There is common agreement that the rapid development of digital technology means that our mediascape will be almost unrecognizable in the near future. This commonness is what rhetoricians call a common place (common and community) that establishes a particular path for an argument about the future of journalism.

Newspapers have been hit by a ‘perfect storm’ of threats surrounding their business models, including: declining print circulation (particularly among young people); the shift of classified advertising to the Internet; the rise of low-cost alternative online news outlets; the rise of citizen journalism, blogging and self-publishing; and fundamental shifts in user behaviour toward accessing news content. In countries such as the United States and Britain, this has led to leading newspapers either going bankrupt or online-only, and threatens to bring down even flagship publications such as the New York Times. 

However, there is limited evidence in Australia of a fundamental shift away from mass media such as television and radio. Rather, what appears to have primarily occurred is a substitution effect between print media (newspapers and magazines) and the Internet. Secondly, the decline in newspaper circulation has not been as sharp in Australia as in the United States. Crikey, On Line Opinion and New Matilda attract only about 5-10% of the readership of online sites such as theaustralian.com.au.

Let’s be clear that the core problem is that advertisers—not readers—are deserting ewspapers. And it is advertisers, not readers, who have always paid the expensive cost of newspaper journalism.

Before I make an argument some philosophical points need to be made about the terms ‘blueprints’ ,‘progress’ and ‘media’ used in the title of the forum—The Future of Journalism: Blueprint for Progress. These presuppose a certain mode of knowledge/power that underpins traditional journalism.

The process of change in the mediascape is such that there can be no blueprint. We just don’t know with certainty. Those who say they have one do so on the basis of ignorance and are more than likely to be   engaged in deception than enlightenment. How many economists had any sense of the global financial crisis or the extent of its fallout? Their blueprint consisted of them all endlessly spinning about the eternal mining boom that would deliver utopia. Instead of ‘blue print’ we should use ‘threshold’ with a map. We stand on a threshold and we can make educated guesses. 

”progress” is two edged not a linear path to the future akin to a yellow brick road. Some things will improve or develop whilst others will deteriorate or die. Consider the effects of the Snowy Mountains Hydro Scheme and the emergence of irrigated agriculture on the ecology of the Murray-Darling river system. Or, if that is not persuasive, consider the powering of capitalism’s growth engine with cheap black and brown coal. Thisenabled Australia to have a competitive advantage. It has given rise to a global heating now weaving a swathe of destruction through irrigated agriculture whilst drying out our landscape.

This implies a regime of knowledge that is universal, knowledge of truth is rock solid certain, accurate knowledge is an instrument for control and mastery. The role of the intellectual/journalist is privileged as a legislator articulating universal and necessary truths. Its a form of knowledge/power that underpins the traditional ‘gatekeeping’ models of journalism, where the process of news gathering is highly centralized and controlled, authority is exclusively held by credentialed professional journalists, and public input is restricted to token

measures such as the Letters to the Editor page.

1

By the reference to commonness, the rhetoricians are trying to imply

a. an understanding that would revolutionize the media in the future.

b. a meeting ground for people who are not in favour with digital technology.

c. a common view which creates a need to think and argue about the future of journalism.

d. a common understanding which makes it clear that the future of journalism is bleak.

2 

Which of the following does not represent the future scenario of journalism as advocated by the author?

a. The journalist who has accurate knowledge of truth will stand to gain.

b. The knowledge of truth that a journalist possesses will make the traditional modes of journalism redundant.

c. A journalist taking on the responsibilities of a legislator and also articulating universal and necessary truths.

d. None of the above.

3 

The primary purpose of the author in the passage is to

a. clarify the background before he makes a particular argument about the future of journalism in the changing mediascape.

b. give examples to support the fact that universal knowledge and universal truth will be the pillars of future journalism.

c. assert that digital technology is creating change in the mediascape and that journalists have to beprepared for the same.

d. attack traditional journalism and point out its inability to adjust to the changing mediascape.

CLICK HERE FOR SOLUTIONS 

CAT 2020  PREP  online   

FRESH BATCHES STARTING IN AUGUST!

CONTACT NOW!

Whatsapp 09674548313!