Middle Tennessee now has one fewer publication, as the Nashville City Paper printed its final edition last month and ceased operations.
I enjoyed picking up the City Paper, but would certainly never have paid money for it, and its absence means very little to my life.
Sorry.
A column in the final edition painted the publication as a “victim,”and begged for a rich “hero” to swoop in, throw a boatload of money at an unnecessary and unprofitable operation and save the day for the people of Nashville (or the employees of the City Paper, more realistically).
And to that I say: Please! C’mon, man. What kind of communist fairy tale are you living in?!
The business community did not value the publication enough to support it sufficiently for the owner to want it to exist any longer.
Now, I operate a publication that I very much want to see continue rolling of the press for a good long time (and understand and accept the risk that at some point there may not be the support for that to be the case), and I like seeing a variety of choices in independent local media (really, and to Local Table, Grease Monkey, Nashville Scene, and all other quality publications offered for free in the area: Good luck! I support you). But that’s life. Businesses close, publications cease printing, things die.
I do strongly support the notion that professional journalists are extremely important. Writers who cover and get to know a beat over a career, and know how to ask the question “why?” are very valuable to society.
But the idea that any community “needs” newspapers is ridiculous. A city needs a newspaper just as the movie industry needs Blockbuster (a parallel referenced in the final City Paper). They don’t. Even if Nashville did need newspapers, why does SouthComm need two publications in the same market?
The death of CDs, particularly those priced at $19.99, is probably a good thing for the music industry, and Blockbuster and Hollywood Video dying are probably a good thing for the movie industry.
The U.S. Post Office should probably close soon, too. Many years ago it was a valuable tool that helped people communicate. But it is an unnecessary waste now. Just because the USPS dies does not mean that people will stop communicating. There are more efficient ways to communicate now, and the private sector does a better job shipping packages.
Ordinary people across the world being able to discuss and share their views with one another instantly is an amazing thing (protect a free and open Internet, people!).
Newspapers have had their chance, and have done a lot of good work. However, generally speaking, for every quality investigative piece in print, there’s about 10 simply echoing whatever propaganda a government official or advertiser wants out there. Newspapers going away could be a good thing for objective discourse.
Information distribution moving to a more online-based model can, eventually, lead to an even better quality of reporting than the newspapermen of old could have ever imagined. (Though, conversely, some of the misinformation and uneducated blabbering and lies on the ‘Net are probably of a lower quality than they could have ever imagined too.)
But, I believe that a talented reporter will be able to sell his skills, and a quality, organized website will be able to sell access to its readership, whether or not dead trees are involved. It’s about ideas, not ink and newsracks.
It’s evolution, baby.
