We’ve been through a couple of weeks of interesting internet posts from the conceptual side of journalism: essays that shed light on aspects of the beast and of the emerging mediascape. You might want to set these aside for a quite evening’s read.

  • 2020 vision: What’s next for news. Dan Conover at Xark has not just written a deep, visionary post, he’s given me my summer assignment: start coming to an understanding of “the new exotics” and what they may mean.
  • What the Structure of Content Means for Context. Josh Young has a long post that needs to be read, and even re-read, that also looks forward. A sample: “Here’s the nut: The news will also be deep and narrow. And it will be shallow and broad.”
  • We’re asking the wrong questions. I wasn’t aware of the Fixing Journalism blog or Michael Higdon until this post. I’m not convinced the questions he suggests are the ones that need to be answered, but I agree we haven’t yet got the questions about journalism, and newspapering, quite right yet.
  • The End of Newspapers. Mark Deuze: “What seems to be lacking from the current debate…is a critical awareness of the workforce restructuring of journalism…” What’s happening with the people in journalism, he argues, is the real tragedy of the “end of newspapers.”
  • Least Publishable Unit. A valuable post for the link between the concept of least publishable unit and the way news is increasingly delivered, and for the range of discussion in the comments. I’m resisting the idea that this is a new, internet-driven phenomenon and think the internet may only make visible something that already existed.
  • A flying seminar on the future of news. If you don’t like my reading list, Seth Lewis has aggregated a series of recent tweets from Jay Rosen with links to what he considers essential recent writings on the future of news. I’ve pointed to most of these at various times: having them compiled in one place is handy.