When newspapers make headlines…

Evolving technology and changing habits are making things tougher for newspapers, claims a tech fan.

BC: What do you think the future will be like?

AD: What happened? Read something terrible in the newspapers today?

BC: No, I read something terrible about the newspapers today.

AD: What do you mean?

BC: Well, newspapers formally began their journey with printed editions in the late 1600s. 300 years later, they extended their reach to the online medium. Soon, we began to have digital versions of newspapers. And now, we’ve reached a point where online newspapers have more takers...

AD: That's because they’re more convenient and certainly more updated...

BC: As a result, the print version began to vanish and web-only newspapers began to thrive. And now, we hear websites buying over newspapers - a far cry from the days when newspapers powered news portals to extend their presence online...

AD: Ok, now I get it... You're obviously upset by Jeff Bezos buying over Washington Post.

BC: But Bezos is not the first tech celebrity to buy a newspaper - Chris Hughes, the co-founder of Facebook bought The New Republic, but...

AD: What are you trying to say?

BC: Technology played a crucial role in ruining the newspaper industry - and now you claim it is rushing to the aid of a struggling newspaper.

AD: Look at it this way - if Bezos plans to marry tradition and technology, we could then have ‘The Washington E-Post’, a futuristic e-paper that could look like something straight out of a Harry Potter book or a Spielberg movie...

BC: I don't think the value of a newspaper can be expressed enough to this generation. When I was working, I remember starting the day with the front pages, reserving the sports and entertainment sections for the train ride to my client's place, and finally solving the crossword, word jumble and other puzzles on my way back from work. By the end of the day, I would have pored through every section of the paper...

AD: Look, it's about business and profits, not about emotions and nostalgia... Besides, who has the time for that today?

BC: Today's generation has all the time in the world for forwards, for posting status messages about burnt toast and for checking their status updates a hundred times a day, but then, where's the time to read a newspaper?

AD: But they’re getting their news feed by the minute on their mobiles - accept the fact that newspapers are losing out to their smarter e-versions…

BC: How can newspapers compete with an adversary that offers services free of cost? In fact, it is a double whammy because with more people preferring digital newspapers worldwide, the traditional print media is not only losing its readership, but also its advertising revenue - with readership dropping, advertisers are also moving away towards the electronic media.

AD: How can you blame them for moving towards where the eyeballs are? Besides, this is nothing new. Radio was challenged by TV, which is being challenged by the internet. It's all about reinventing yourself and keeping pace with the times...

BC: What rankles the industry is the fact that people can go straight to Google News and get all the news they want, free of cost. It's like a free online library...

AD: Google is actually directing readers to different newspaper sites - according to statistics, the site facilitates around six billion hits to various newspaper sites.

BC: But at the rate at which things are going, Google might be playing a much bigger role than we can ever imagine.

AD: How?

BC: All along, we used Google to search for news and information. Now, we might have to use it to locate the whereabouts of the newspapers that are vanishing from the scene.

The day the music died…

An old-timer cribs about the one thing that music can do without, but is forced to live with – technology.

AD: Hey, what are you listening to?

BC: Some vintage wonders from the 60s. They simply don't...

AD: ...make such music any more, right?

BC: It's clichéd, but true, isn't it? There's something so simple and nice about those songs that makes you want to close your eyes and lose yourself in them...

AD:  Why would you want to compare music from two different eras?

BC: Technology is the key difference - its excessive use is bringing down the standard of music today, especially in the movies...

AD: Why do you say that?

BC: Music seems to be created more by computers and software than by composers today. Back then, we had songs played out by large orchestras. Imagine all those violins and flutes and...

AD: Today's music is snappy and is obviously loved by the present generation, otherwise it wouldn't continue to exist.

BC: But there's no soul in most of the songs we hear today. They don't draw you into their world... Synthetic, metallic and noisy are the kind of adjectives that one would choose to describe today's music...

AD: Those are sweeping statements, probably based on what you've listened to... Movie songs are so vastly different across languages... the south possibly prefers music with a local flavour, while Hindi numbers are getting increasingly westernized...

BC: But technology has changed the way music is composed - so much of it is pre-programmed and the focus seems to be on mixing it right and not on creating fresh music.

AD: If not for technology, a lot of old-world music could be lost forever... Thanks to digital technology, several songs that would otherwise have been wiped out have been restored. There was an interesting article a couple of months back about how scientists used X-rays to restore a 200-year old opera...

BC: Ah, it must have revealed the skeletal structure of the song… But seriously speaking, I don’t have a problem with technology. It’s only that we seem to rely so heavily on it to...

AD: And what about the treasure trove of old songs that video sites like YouTube offers us? Practically every song and every piece of music that you would want to listen to or search for is available online...

BC: iTunes' library is equally impressive...

AD: Even accessing these songs has become simpler, as these songs are forwarded and shared many times over on social networking sites...

BC: I have a friend who shares old songs with little gems of information about them on Facebook...

AD: I know, I get those links too. And what about mobile downloads? You don't even have to carry a CD player any longer - your mobile has become your personal music player...

BC: Today, iPods and mp3 players have wiped out the music stores and several CD labels…

AD: And all those services with free downloads will eat into the market share of paid services like iTunes, Deezer and Spotify. That’s the point - technology keeps evolving, but the music continues…

BC: I recall an article that talked about a cellular service provider making more money through song downloads than music companies...

AD: That's right. Can you imagine the joy of carrying a thousand songs in your pocket?

BC: The problem is that when you get addicted to downloads, quantity scores over the finer aspects of a song. I get the feeling that people are spending more time downloading songs than they are, listening to them.

AD: But think of the advantages - there was a time when you had to hunt around for LP records or wait for the radio to play your favourite songs. But now, you can download them in about a minute.

BC: That timeframe is quite significant.

AD: Why, because downloads have become that fast?

BC: No, because that's all the time that people remember a song for. After that, it's time to move on to the next big chartbuster...