The Death of the Newsroom
Newsrooms across America are rapidly declining with layoffs and downsizing. The New York Times is one publication that is cutting editorial staff. (Provided/ Pixabay.com).
The New York Times released an article saying that they have decided to cut half of their editing layers and half of their staff so that the newspaper could have more of an online newsroom. The decision came after an undercover study was performed in their newsroom for a year.
The article was written by Sydney Ember and was released Monday in the business section of the paper.
The main reason that The Times is doing this is because, economically, going digital would be more cost-efficient and would save a few trees in the process.
“The goal is to reconfigure the news report so that it aligns with the range of digital offerings audiences now expect,” Sydney Ember said.
The plan is to get away from more print-focused roles.
There is a problem with this. Bringing it locally, if the newsroom were to be taken out of the Mass Communication building at UCO, an entire element of communication between the Vista and UCentral News would be lost.
It would also be harder to build personal relationships with coworkers, something that has affected my work tremendously.
Having a newsroom builds accountability not just for groups but for individuals. There is a sense of value in doing true work and having a greater strive to search for all the possible information in a story because, in the end, I know that people I trust are going to read it and tell me what I need to fix and what I did well.
Editing articles is not done for fun and not to be taken lightly. It is done out of necessity for the understanding of everyone that will later read the article. This prevents false information or a miscommunication of information finding its way into stories and articles.
Ridding ourselves of print newspaper and newsrooms may serve to make sense economically, but we are sacrificing more than we think to go digital.