Online News Progress???

Recently, I was shocked to discover that one of Chicago’s arguably most popular newspaper companies, The Chicago Tribune, has just filed for bankruptcy on December 8th. While many people may believe this bankruptcy was caused by the current economic crisis that the world is currently facing, an article detailing the bankruptcy states, “[The Tribune] is the first major newspaper publisher to file for bankruptcy protection since the Internet plunged the industry into a struggle for survival” (Chase). This suggests that the Internet and the many articles to be read online have rapidly been taking over the news industry, and are beginning to make newspapers become obsolete. Multiple people may argue that the Internet and the availability of news articles online is illustrating progress through being environmentally friendly, inexpensive, and easy. However, Nicholas Carr author of article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid” argues that online articles are causing him to lose his capability of reading texts offline by stating, “…What the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski” (Carr). While in this context Carr may not be directly stating that online newspaper articles are making him less intelligent, he is indicating that with the larger presence of online resources, people are becoming more incapable of reading offline texts. With newspapers such as The Chicago Tribune becoming obsolete, the online news industry becomes more successful and popular, which, according to Carr, could potentially make people even less smart by skimming through the topics of various online articles.

Aside from potentially lowering people’s maximum intellectual capacities, the expansion of online news articles also may not be seen as progress because this causes multiple people in the newspaper industry to become jobless. The article regarding the bankruptcy stated, “Tribune already has made hundreds of layoffs” (Chase). But the downfall of one industry is the rise of another. While many people that work in the newspaper industry are becoming jobless, multiple people are most likely being hired for online news articles. In the essay, “Self-Reliance”, Ralph Waldo Emerson writes, “Society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other” (Emerson), the newspaper industry is the side that is currently receding, while online articles are becoming more popular. When looked at together it appears Emerson is correct, no side is causing society to actually progress or advance, instead, society is simply changing its method of news distribution. Personally, I find that I enjoy both of these methods of news circulation for different reasons. I occasionally like to eat breakfast while leisurely reading through the articles on the cover of the newspaper. I find that I enjoy reading the paper when I relax, whereas I like online news articles for their convenience whenever I am curious about something. However, if every “progression” has both positives and negatives, and Emerson’s argument that society does not advance is true, then is there a point in attempting to advance at all?

Toys vs. Coats

This past week, I have completed a lot of work regarding the charity program, Adopt-a-Family, with several other members of my advisory. While shopping for the people in the family that my advisory adopted, I noticed what while we did give each person a few toys and other nonessential items, the majority of the budget for each family member was spent on basic necessities such as clothing and warm winter jackets. During the shopping trip, a few people in my advisory picked out an inexpensive winter jacket for one of the children so that we could have more money for toys, however, my advisor quickly told them to exchange the coat for a higher quality, warmer one, and sacrifice a few toys. She said, “It’s better to be warm. If you are sick and cold, there is no point in toys anyway”. So, at the end our shopping trip, I viewed all of the purchased items together. I saw multiple boxes filled with coats, warm clothing, gloves, hats, socks, and scarves, but only a few boxes filled with toys such as Barbie’s and action figures. At first, I had thought that it may be possible that the children that we are giving these various presents to would be upset for the lack of toys that we are donating. However, shortly after this thought entered my mind, I realized that people probably would rather receive things that they need instead of items that they may want. This impoverished family that we are “adopting” does not have the money to fulfill basic necessities such as clothing, therefore, when each person opens up their gifts, they may in fact be more happy opening up an essential item instead of an unneeded toy that the children may grow out of.

This experience made me think a lot about Henry David Thoreau and his book, Walden. In the chapter, “Economy”, Thoreau states, “The necessaries for man in this climate may, accurately enough, be distributed under several heads of Food, Shelter, Clothing, and Fuel” (Thoreau, 8). While my advisory was unable to provide food, shelter, or fuel for our family, we tried our best to fulfill the basic need of clothing. Thoreau continues to state that excessive amounts of these needs become unnecessary as well, therefore, my advisory attempted to purchase practical forms of clothing. The Adopt-a-Family experience made me realize that Thoreau was correct in thinking that any excessive items after needed items are unnecessary, and it made me think of all the things I own and don’t need. People who have all their needs fulfilled should be more thankful because some, such as this family, do not even have necessary items. Thoreau argues that the only thing people really need are the four necessaries listed above, so I hope the family my advisory “adopted” will be pleased while opening gifts that they need, and not necessarily want.