<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: News? No thanks, not really interested</title>
	<atom:link href="http://evolvingnewsroom.co.nz/news-no-thanks-not-really-interested/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://evolvingnewsroom.co.nz/news-no-thanks-not-really-interested</link>
	<description>Journalism links and observations from Julie Starr</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 10:11:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon</title>
		<link>http://evolvingnewsroom.co.nz/news-no-thanks-not-really-interested/comment-page-1#comment-2030</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:19:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://evolvingnewsroom.co.nz/2008/01/27/news-no-thanks-not-really-interested/#comment-2030</guid>
		<description>I am not convinced by the argument that people are consuming less news. To my mind there has never been more news available in the media or being consumed. I think the issue here is that the traditional news sources are seeing dramatic audience declines.

It is not long ago that the newspaper and the six o&#039;clock news were the main source of news for most people, supplemented potentially by short radio bulletins (generally lifted whole or in part from the previously mentioned).

These two main news vehicles have been cannibalised in the last ten or more years by a plethora of new news sources. We have seen a massive proliferation of new channels available of TV, the same is true of radio and finally the advent of the internet and mobile as news sources. This does not suggest a lack of interest in news per se, actually quite the contrary. Apart from sport and porn, news has been the content that has driven the most proliferation of new channels across all media.

I think if it was possible to define the reach of news across all media in a given day or week I believe it would be little changed even perhaps ahead.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not convinced by the argument that people are consuming less news. To my mind there has never been more news available in the media or being consumed. I think the issue here is that the traditional news sources are seeing dramatic audience declines.</p>
<p>It is not long ago that the newspaper and the six o&#8217;clock news were the main source of news for most people, supplemented potentially by short radio bulletins (generally lifted whole or in part from the previously mentioned).</p>
<p>These two main news vehicles have been cannibalised in the last ten or more years by a plethora of new news sources. We have seen a massive proliferation of new channels available of TV, the same is true of radio and finally the advent of the internet and mobile as news sources. This does not suggest a lack of interest in news per se, actually quite the contrary. Apart from sport and porn, news has been the content that has driven the most proliferation of new channels across all media.</p>
<p>I think if it was possible to define the reach of news across all media in a given day or week I believe it would be little changed even perhaps ahead.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

