What will journalism look like in five years?  That’s the multi-billion dollar question.  And luckily for journalists, they still have time to shape that answer.  But if the higher-ups in the journalism world sit back and watch the next five years sprint past them the way the last five years have, it will be too late.

By that time, journalism will already be in the hands of businessmen, entertainers, amateurs.  Anyone but journalists.

So it is absolutely essential that starting yesterday, journalists are proactive in shaping the future of their industry.  Take hold of citizen journalism.  Don’t let it evolve into a massive adversary, but cultivate it into a valuable ally.  Charge for your content!  Don’t keep trying to figure out creative ways to turn your business into little more than an information gathering, article writing, fund-raiser.  That’s not what’s going to keep journalism alive.  Fund-raising is great for smaller, more locally based news organizations, but national news authorities must figure out ways to charge a fee and make a profit.

And while the integrity of good journalism should never be sacrificed, there’s no reason why journalists need to shy away from working with businesspeople and entertainers to create an enjoyable, profitable product.  In fact, if journalism is to survive, they won’t have a choice.

But I truly believe that journalism will be alive and well in five years time.  Journalism needs to adapt.  If it doesn’t, it will die.  And there’s just too much money at stake for anyone to let that happen.

-As I have stated in a previous post, I believe that Rosenblum’s ideas about the future of journalism are misguided.  So the question I pose is this: where will journalism be in 5-10 years if the Michael Rosenblum’s of the world take it over?  The response to this might be, “Well, at least journalism would still exist if that were the case!”  To which I say, “No.  It wouldn’t.”

-Despite the fact that I have been critical of Rosenblum’s ideas for the future of the journalism industry, I do believe that he is a brilliant businessman.  His belief that people need to come up with their own good ideas instead of waiting to attach themselves to someone else’s is spot on.  But with this sentiment in mind, will journalism survive in the hands of large companies or does the future belong to the entrepreneurial journalist?

Brian Farnham:

-Farnham spoke about how Patch.com has an advertisement driven revenue system.  He also spoke about how the website has yet to make any money.  So can Patch and future sites like it survive on revenue from smaller local businesses?  Might they have to sell ad space to larger businesses, or would that abandon their mission of serving individual communities?

-One of the most interesting things about Patch.com is the “Beliefs” section of their editors’ profiles.  I admit that I am not sure how to feel about this.  On the one hand, it is refreshing to see a serious news organization that doesn’t pretend to be the epitome of objective journalism.  But on the other hand, it seems to go without saying that people have their own beliefs, but they don’t belong anywhere near the news itself.  So will this type of ultra-transparent journalism catch on?

By eating just one of these little berries, it makes everything that’s sour or acidic taste sweet for the next 60 minutes or so.  You can bite right into a lemon, drink vinegar straight up, even Tabasco sauce, and it will be sweet like candy.   Now, scientists are trying to figure out ways to get the main taste-altering component of the berry (miraculin) into certain foods to make them taste better.  The hope is that the fruit can be harnessed to make unappetizing, healthy foods taste sweet and delicious.  So instead of munching on junk food to satisfy a hunger pang, you can reach for something a lot healthier.

Journalism is in desperate need of it’s own “miracle fruit”.  Unfortunately, Michael Rosenblum wants to keep feeding people potato chips.

There’s no doubt that Rosenblum brought up some great points about the business of journalism and the fact that profits shouldn’t be looked at as evil.  Because journalism IS a business and your news organization, however noble, WILL die if you don’t treat it like one.  But that doesn’t mean that you should sacrifice the foundations of good, honest, objective journalism in the name of capitalism.

In Rosenblum’s philosophy, the journalist is a slave to the bottom line.  So if it gets ratings, do it, otherwise, scrap it.  Who wants to hear about “news” anyway?  You know what people really want?  Zombies!!

Don’t get me wrong, the zombie thing was funny and entertaining.  But it’s not news.

IT IS NOT NEWS!

Rosenblum is more documentarian than journalist, which is fine.  Just don’t try to pass it off as news.  Because if you do, we’re all in trouble.  Big trouble.

Real journalism is the veggies: it’s not always the most appetizing, but it’s good for you.  Rosenblum claims to be pioneering the future of journalism, when what he’s really doing is trying to pass off candy as vegetables just because people like it better.  What journalism really needs is someone who knows how to get that miracle fruit, someone who knows how to make the veggies TASTE like candy.  That’s real innovation.

Michael Rosenblum is clearly a brilliant businessman and in many respects a visionary.  He’s also not afraid to tell you that profits are a good thing, and that’s definitely refreshing to hear.  But the truth is, what Rosenblum does is not journalism.  It’s entertaining, cutting edge, cost effective, and very impressive.  It’s just not journalism.  And hopefully, it’s not the direction the industry goes in.

The miracle fruit is out there, someone just needs to find it.  But to settle for less isn’t journalism, it’s lazy.

-Everyone is pretty much in unanimous agreement that print journalism is dead, but what is the future for television journalism?

-Is citizen journalism a good thing for the industry?

-What about radio?  Most people today only listen to the radio in the car and half of that time is either tuned into FM or the CD player.  Where does radio news go in the future?

-What is causing journalism as an industry more trouble:  the economy or the technology?

Participants of the “Reporter at Sea” campaign can post a video on reporteratsea.usatoday.com that shows off their reporting prowess (though the entry period has since passed- sorry).   On Oct. 20, people can check out the 10 finalists and vote for their favorite, with the winner announced on Nov. 1, 2009.  The winner will receive an all-expense-paid trip for two on Royal Caribbean’s “Oasis of the Seas”.

But don’t think that the winner will be spending his or her time working on that November tan-  Royal Caribbean plans on putting those reporting skills to work!  The winner will go from petty “citizen journalist” to “Special Field Correspondent”.  Impressive!  The “correspondent” will contribute news to USA Today‘s “Cruise Log” and will have access to the ship’s files while interacting with USA Today cruise editor, Gene Sloan.  Director of brand communications for Royal Caribbean, Tracy Quan, said that the focus of the “Reporter at Sea” campaign is to create “buzz and excitement” with minimal advertising.

This actually seems like an intelligent and refreshing take on the old “give away” concept.  With citizen journalism quickly gaining popularity for a multitude of reasons, it is possible that more companies could follow Royal Caribbean’s lead for an advertiser-free and “buzz” generating campiagn.  It is also a bit ironic that Royal Caribbean’s solution to advertising is journalism, and that journalism continues to lack any solution for advertising.

Maybe they should try cruise ships?

Twitter, for better or worse (may I submit the latter?), has all but conquered communication as we know it.  And so too has it made the seemingly effortless transition to news.  But is this really the future of news, in one form or another?  I would hardly call Twitter updates (“tweets”, if you will) journalism, but the fact is that many people do use Twitter as an effective resource to  “report” events (“Just had a taco for the 1st time! omg sooo good” does not count as an event).

Case in point, the recent fopaux made by President Obama wherein he called a Mr. Kanye West “a jackass”.  The remark was made during some casual pre-interview banter between the President and CNBC’s John Harwood, in reference to West storming the stage of the MTV Video Music Awards while Taylor Swift was accepting an award to say that Beyonce deserved it instead.  A few of those who heard the remark swiftly (I had too…) went to “tweet” about it.  Former White House correspondent Terry Moran was amongst the few, as he tweeted: ” Pres. Obama just called Kanye West a ‘jackass’ for his outburst at VMAs when Taylor Swift won.  Now THAT’S presidential.”  Now, surely this isn’t journalism, not in any traditional sense, but then again it is closer to where journalism is headed than many would like to believe.  The fact is, most people can’t think beyond 140 characters-per-thought anyway, or at least they feel terribly inconvenienced if made to.

With news becoming more up-to-the-second all the time, stories can’t always be sprawling with detail.  When it comes to news that is happening right now, it needs to be short and to the point, and that’s how people want it.  With that said, Twitter is NOT journalism and should never be accepted as a substitute.  But the fact remains that Twitter seems to be on to something as it’s popularity has hit the stratosphere rather quickly.  Those in the journalism world would be foolish not to take notice.

So really, how can the newspapers compete? The answer is: they can’t. We live in a world where people need everything, and they needed it five minutes ago! Newspapers, as they exist right now, can never expect to cater to this increasingly impatient demographic.

Right now, the newspaper is the Walkman of the news world. Big, clumsy, and basically useless when you’ve got all these iPods around. Sure, grandpa may stick with the Walkman because the iPod is too complicated and annoying. After all, they both play music right? But before long, generation iPod will take over. And if you couldn’t follow that admittedly poor analogy, let me put it in terms a bit less convoluted: the newspaper is DEAD! People don’t want it, and if people don’t want what you’re selling you don’t make money!

How do you run a newspaper? You can’t. Not for very long anyway. Unless maybe you’ve got Charles Foster Kane’s money.