I’m not the first to ruminate on the parallels between Kennedy + television, and Obama + internet. But what are the implications for the media?
I was thinking about all the recent commentary about the death of print journalism, but the ascendance of TV news didn’t actually spell the death of print back in the 60’s. Why not? The TV technology was pretty ubiquitous. However, I think the lack of immediacy of TV for most events limited its utility – news was already reducing to sound bites on TV. (Most events – things like the Kennedy assassination, which I remember, was covered in real time. But the most immersive coverage didn’t come until later, and news was mostly allocated to limited time slots.)
On the other hand, the internet can supply the rough equivalents of both print and TV – and radio. Can the internet kill TV news? Certainly the reaction of cable news to bloggers suggests they feel threatened. The immediacy of the internet rivals cable TV, but the former is also amenable to long form journalism. Anyway, I remain impressed by how the Obama administration is using the new medium, and will be interested in seeing the evolution.
(OT – the spell checker needs to have "Obama" entered into its dictionary.)