Print-is-dead vs. long-live-print debate rages

Source: 

[Commentary] The debate over the future of print media has generated some interesting sound bites of late: Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told The Washington Post that ink-on-paper is dead in 10 years. Rupert Murdoch, meanwhile, expressed cautious optimism at a conference sponsored by his Wall Street Journal that print will be round for "at least 20 years, and outlive me." What's become increasingly clear is that if Murdoch is right, newspapers and magazines will be very different - in format and frequency - from what we see now. Followers of the economic theory of creative destruction know that a basic tenet of any successful business is that if you stand still, you're dead - and even if you keep improving your product, the odds are against you staying on top for long. As the Internet roils the media world, the degree of innovation - both inspired and desperate - is accelerating on the print side of the business in the United States. (In some parts of the world, print is booming.) It used to be that every few years a newspaper or magazine would switch editors and redesign to "freshen up". Not only do redesigns seem commonplace now, but more fundamental changes are in the offing.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/13/magazines/fortune/Print_is_dead_siklos.f...


Print-is-dead vs. long-live-print debate rages