For me the last week was a bit of an eye-opener to the way the world or at least the media is changing. I am not sure I understand it but it did raise some questions. A few days ago, I attended an informal release in Mumbai of Bangalore-based media analyst Amu Joseph's book on women in the print media. The event was attended by a small group of senior journalists, mostly women. The ensuing discussion revolved around the differences between male and female reporters, the significance of networking, problems in the newsroom, obstacles in collecting information, etc, etc. Perennial issues.At the same time, looking around me I observed how much had changed. Of the dozen or so people present, less than half were still attached to publications. The rest had all become part-time journalists, writing the occasional article and spending their time doing other things writing books, social activism, and so on. Even among the full-time staffers there was none of the zeal and fire that one was used to seeing a decade ago. My vague impression was further confirmed when one of the attendees confessed, surprisingly considering she still works for a prominent newspaper: "It is so nice to come here and feel part of a profession again."Over the next few days coincidentally I happened to visit a few offices all devoted to emerging portals on the Internet. With minor variations, the spiel was the same at each place. Information sites are being launched on the Net. The fare is the familiar news/films/fashion/ music/ youth/ sports/ finance/ culture mix. Will you set up a reporting network li-ke a newspaper, I asked one would-be media baron. No, I was told, th-ere are existing so-urces and we can always use the wire services. Do you see a role for journalists in your business, I enquired. Just a few, we are not that concerned about the news, we are more into infotainment, was the answer. How exactly do you see your portal, I asked. As an opportunity to leverage in marketing terms, I was told.I looked at the content planned by the various companies and noticed that apart from one instance which could be said to have a marginal international appeal all the sites were aimed at Indians. Many of the people I met had no previous experience in the business of information gathering or communication. Yet they worked out of plush offices, boasted of runaway plans for expansion and appeared to have deep pockets. To know how deep one needn't even go anywhere. The massive hoardings all over and the full-page advertiseme-nts in the press are more than suffici-ent indicators.And maybe th-ere is something that I am missing in all this but I am puzzled. I am puzzled on several co-unts. For instance, for years we were told there was no money in the business of information. The opportunity for public service and respect were expected to compensate journalists for low salaries and seedy workplaces. In fact, opportunities for advancement have shrunk so much that in a city like Mumbai a whole segment of older journalists have left the profession for better opportunities, notably with NGOs, television or in public relations.How then does a new medium with a smaller reach nationally than a medium-sized paper could boast of in just one city attract so many players and so much finance? Even if one assumes that the Internet being a freeway has a global audience, there is then the fact that most content does not travel, nor is every advertiser interested in reaching a diverse audience. One could predict that the national audience will grow by leaps and bounds over the next few years but surely it is the same audience that exists for other media? What I am suggesting is that while growing literacy and other factors might have widened the audience for information in the country, the revolution underway is technological and has limitations. A slice of the money that is available to the Net could arguably have gone to traditional media with better results.Maybe I am wrong and there is a huge market round the corner for web sites a recent article mention page hits by the millions. Or perhaps my hunch is right and the dotcom craze is a bubble waiting to burst and only a few of the serious players will eventually prove their mettle. In the meantime though some assumptions will have become even more ingrained than they currently are. To mention a few: People don't particularly care for news. You cannot have too much entertainment. The quality of information is not important. People read primarily to buy. To be fair, these are arguments that already exist and are only going to snowball with the advent of this new medium. Are they myths or are they truly reflective of a social trend? If it is the latter, we are already moving in the right direction. But if it is the former and if at some point the consumer is going to tire of being treated to a diet of films, cricket and shopping and begin to demand real news, then he might have a problem in that there might befewer and fewer people left to supply it.
