Newspapers: The decline in print media- The impact of Google

Read this article looking at the impact Google has had on the traditional newspaper business.

Answer the following questions:

1) Why has Google led to the decline of the newspaper industry?
They take a large share (billions) from the revenue that businesses make from advertising. Therefore, newspapers don't receive all the money they deserve, meaning they struggle to fund their business and provide quality content.

2) Find a statistic from the article that illustrates the decline of traditional news media.
Over the past decade or so — more than $40 billion, or about 60 percent of the ad revenue the industry generated at its peak in 2000, of advertising money has been lost.

3) Looking at the graph featured in the article, what period has seen the steepest decline in newspaper advertising revenue? 
The years between 2003-2007 faced the steepest decline in newspaper advertising revenue. 

4) Do you personally think Google is to blame for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs? Why?
Personally, I think that Google isn't to blame directly for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs but it does feed in to the bigger picture. The introduction of the internet (in around 1990) revolutionised the world. People began reading less newspapers because the news was available for free online.

The graph above shows that there was a dramatic decline in newspaper revenue at around 1993 but it increased after that until it declined again in 2001. This is probably due to the fact that the internet and news on the internet became more advanced at this time.  Google was founded in 1998 and this platform made it easier for anyone to post news or other content online for millions of people to access. As the years go by, people have become less and less willing to actually pay for news, they expect to receive it for free. Furthermore, it has become more convenient to just read news online due to the advancement of mobile phones and tablets.

5) Read the comments below the article. Pick one comment you agree with and one you disagree with and explain your response to the comments in detail.
'Obviously, Google is not to blame. I don’t think it’s about blame. I think the Internet is incredibly poorly designed. Rather than being free, everything on it should cost something in order to compensate creators.' - I disagree with the fact that everything on the internet should cost something. People are already required to pay to have internet at home or on their phones so asking them to pay for the content they access would be unfair. Maybe the money paid for the internet should be shared between the content creators as well.

'The irony is that Google is probably more of a saviour than a killer of journalism and editorial content. How many thousands of blogs, fan sites, writers, startup outlets, etc., have been discovered by Google’s search algorithms? How many talented artists and great stories have found a launching pad on YouTube and other Google outlets? How much content has been spread into new languages due to Google translate?


Google has forced journalistic outlets to innovate and search for new ways of doing things. It has made information dissemination more efficient. While at times that has been bad for the average journalist trying to make a buck, from a big picture perspective, it has been good for helping people get access to information, and that includes journalism.'  - I agree with this comment. Google and the internet have made it easier for people to share their own ideas and be creative. It has also allowed newspapers to progress when old-fashioned ways of reading the news have declined.