Connect with us

Media

Conservative and social media usage associated with misinformation about COVID-19 – EurekAlert

Published

on


People who relied on conservative media or social media in the early days of the COVID-19 outbreak were more likely to be misinformed about how to prevent the virus and believe conspiracy theories about it, a study of media use and public knowledge has found.

Based on an Annenberg Science Knowledge survey fielded in early March with over a thousand adults, the study was conducted by researchers at the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

The study, published this week in the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, found that there were notable differences in views about the coronavirus that correlated with people’s media consumption.

Media usage and COVID-19 misinformation

Conservative media usage (such as Fox News and Rush Limbaugh) correlated with higher levels of misinformation and belief in conspiracies about the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, including:

Social media and web aggregator usage was associated with lower levels of information and higher levels of misinformation:

  • People who used social media (such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) were more likely to believe that taking vitamin C can prevent infection with the coronavirus; that some in the CDC were exaggerating the threat to harm the president; and that the virus was created by the U.S. government;
  • People who used web aggregators (such as Google News, Yahoo News) were less likely to believe in the effectiveness of hand washing and avoidance of symptomatic individuals as ways to prevent transmission of the virus (in early March, asymptomatic transmission was less clear).

Mainstream broadcast and print media usage correlated with higher levels of correct information and lower levels of misinformation:

  • People who reported using broadcast news (such as ABC News, CBS News, NBC News) were more likely to say, correctly, that the novel coronavirus is more lethal than the seasonal flu.
  • People who consume mainstream print news (such as The New York Times, Wall Street Journal) were more likely to hold accurate beliefs about the virus. They were more likely to report that they believe that regular hand washing and avoiding contact with symptomatic people are ways to prevent infection with the coronavirus; and less likely to believe that vitamin C can prevent infection, that some in the CDC were exaggerating the threat in order to undermine the president, and that the Chinese government created the virus as a bioweapon.

“Because both information and misinformation can affect behavior, we all ought be doing our part not only to increase essential knowledge about SARS-CoV-2, but also to interdict the spread of deceptions about its origins, prevention, and effects,” said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC), who co-authored the paper with Dolores Albarracín of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, an APPC distinguished research fellow. “Additionally, all forms of media should ask, Are our audiences better prepared to deal with this coronavirus as a result of our work or is their trust in us endangering them and their communities?”

Jamieson said that people seeking to verify information can go to government health sites such as the CDC website or to APPC’s fact-checking project, FactCheck.org.

Annenberg Science Knowledge survey findings

The study is the first in a series on COVID-19 by APPC, which conducted similar research in 2016 on the Zika virus and in 2019 on vaccination during the measles outbreak. “Like the earlier studies, the current effort will track the success of the media in presenting accurate information and of health communicators in getting the message out,” Jamieson said.

The Annenberg Science Knowledge (ASK) survey on COVID-19 was conducted March 3-8, 2020, among a nationally representative sample of 1,008 U.S. adults. The survey, conducted for APPC by SSRS, an independent research company, has a margin of error of ±3.57%.

The survey found that 87% correctly said regular hand washing and avoiding people with virus symptoms were preventative measures against COVID-19, a success in public health messaging. But it also found troubling gaps in public knowledge and worrisome belief in conspiracy theories:

  • More than 1 in 5 respondents (23%) thought it was probably or definitely true that the Chinese had created the virus as a bioweapon (there is no evidence of this);
  • More than 1 in 5 (21%) thought taking vitamin C can probably or definitely prevent infection by the coronavirus (it does not);
  • Nearly 1 in 5 (19%) said it was probably or definitely true that some in the CDC were exaggerating the danger posed by the virus in order to damage the Trump presidency;
  • And 1 in 10 (10%) said it was probably or definitely true that the U.S. government had created the virus (there is no evidence of this).

“The findings from this ASK survey contribute to the scholarship on health and science communication while also providing insights on what to do as the U.S. resolves this pandemic,” Albarracín said. “The next step will be to test the efficacy of the recommendations suggested by this research.”

Five recommendations

The researchers offered five recommendations to improve public understanding of the virus:

1) The need for proactive communication about prevention: While a high portion of the public (87%) knew that hand washing and avoiding symptomatic people were preventative measures, gaps in public knowledge “should alert public health officials to the ongoing need for effective communication of needed information long before a crisis.”

2) Find out what information to debunk: In order to focus fact-checkers most effectively, the researchers proposed prioritizing corrections for misinformation held by at least 10% of the population. Here, for instance, the conspiracy theory that the virus was developed by the Chinese as a bioweapon (held by 23%) and that some in the CDC exaggerated the threat to harm the president (19%) should be prioritized by fact-checkers.

3) A baseline for monitoring social media interventions: By offering an early window on misinformation in the pandemic, the study provides a way to assess the social media platforms’ efforts to blunt the effects of misinformation.

4) Proposed interventions in conservative media: The study should motivate public health officials to place public service announcements, encourage hyperlinks to CDC web pages, and seek interviews on news outlets whose audiences are less knowledgeable, more misinformed, or more accepting of conspiracy theories. The researchers noted that Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, did that on March 11 by going on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show, where Fauci explained that coronavirus is much more lethal than the seasonal flu.

5) Newspapers should take down paywalls on coronavirus coverage: The finding that reading mainstream print publications is associated with greater knowledge of the virus should encourage print media to follow the lead of publications such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, and others to make their virus coverage free to all readers. Readers who appreciate the public health coverage may respond by subscribing – or with donations.

###

“The Relation Between Media Consumption and Misinformation at the Outset of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic in the US” is published in the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review’s April 2020 issue.

The study was funded by the Science of Science Communication Endowment of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. Some of the work was facilitated by National Institutes of Health grants.

The Annenberg Public Policy Center was established in 1993 to educate the public and policy makers about communication’s role in advancing public understanding of political, health, and science issues at the local, state and federal levels.

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Media

Hong Kong's free media fears being silenced by China's national security law – Financial Post

Published

on


HONG KONG — When a team of producers at Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK) heard on May 19 that the publicly funded broadcaster planned to axe one of its most popular weekly shows, they rushed to the building next door to confront the station’s head.

A group of about 20 producers and other employees from RTHK’s TV and radio operations barged into a conference room where Leung Ka-wing, director of broadcasting, was meeting with top executives.

Some staff demanded to know why the satirical and current affairs television show “Headliner” – which had drawn official complaints after poking fun at the Hong Kong police in an episode in February – was being canceled, and whether the move was prompted by pressure from authorities.

The impromptu meeting lasted about 90 minutes, during which several staffers cried and raised their voices, according to three people present. Leung said he took the decision to cancel the show in order to “protect RTHK” and its staff, according to the three people.

As conversations continued inside the conference room, RTHK announced it was suspending production of the Chinese-language show, which had been running since 1989, at the end of the current season. RTHK apologized to anyone offended by the station’s output but did not give a reason for the suspension.

Leung, 67, who made his name in broadcasting during the Tiananmen Square crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Beijing in 1989, declined to answer Reuters’ questions about the meeting. He denied making the comment about protecting RTHK, according to RTHK spokeswoman Amen Ng. Other executives in the meeting that Reuters could identify did not reply to requests for comment.

Hong Kong’s government did not comment on whether it had pressured Leung to cancel the show.

RTHK, founded in 1928 and sometimes compared to the British Broadcasting Corporation, is the only independent, publicly funded media outlet on Chinese soil. It is guaranteed editorial independence by its charter.

The cancellation of “Headliner” has prompted fear among some journalists that mounting pressure from the Hong Kong government and Beijing will destroy that independence.

Hong Kong reached boiling point last summer as millions of pro-democracy protesters took to the streets and some of them clashed violently with police, posing one of the biggest challenges to China’s leader Xi Jinping since he came to power in 2012.

In response to the protests, China said last month it would introduce national security legislation in Hong Kong to prohibit secession, subversion and external interference. More than a dozen people working at RTHK and other media organizations told Reuters they fear that legislation could be used to silence or shut down independent media in the territory.

The situation is like being under the blade of a guillotine, said Jimmy Lai, the publisher of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy Apple Daily newspaper, which like RTHK, has for years drawn the ire of Hong Kong’s government and Beijing: “There’s no half-way. It’s falling.”

Lai, 72, has been repeatedly denounced by state-run Beijing media and pro-China media in Hong Kong, painting him as the local face of what they describe as a U.S. interference campaign. He has been arrested twice this year on charges of illegal assembly related to protests last year.

Lai and some other members of the media fear the new legislation – which has not yet been set out in detail – will make Hong Kong more like mainland China, where the ruling Communist Party runs or controls the vast majority of media and routinely censors dissenting views. The country imprisoned at least 48 journalists last year, more than any other country, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Hong Kong’s leader Carrie Lam has denied the new legislation would curtail media freedom, saying last month that “freedom of expression, freedom of protest, freedom of journalism, will stay.” Hong Kong is guaranteed freedom of speech and the press under Article 27 of the Basic Law, the mini-constitution agreed by China when it took back control of former British colony in 1997.

A spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs told Reuters the proposed legislation “only targets activities related to subversion, separatism, terrorism and foreign interference into Hong Kong affairs,” and that it will “not affect freedom of speech, media freedoms, or any other rights and freedoms.”

China’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong, Beijing’s official base in the city, did not reply to requests for comment on whether China sought to control or suppress RTHK or if the new national security legislation would curtail media freedom in Hong Kong.

UNDER THE MICROSCOPE

Scrutiny of RTHK has increased dramatically since late February, when a two-minute segment on “Headliner” entitled ‘Police Farce Report’ showed an actor dressed as a Hong Kong police officer standing inside a large rubbish container with his hands covered in plastic.

The skit shows police in various situations wearing biohazard suits and masks, satirizing how well equipped police officers are compared to medical workers. The actor, Kwong Ngai-yee, told Reuters the idea was based on the “Sesame Street” puppet Oscar the Grouch and that he hoped to “ease public anger through humor.”

Hong Kong police were not amused. The force’s commissioner Chris Tang complained to Leung in writing in early March, saying the show “smeared the police and their work during the coronavirus period.” RTHK had “reversed right and wrong, and we simply can’t accept it,” Tang wrote in the letter, which was made public by RTHK.

On the morning of May 19, Hong Kong’s Communications Authority, which regulates the city’s broadcast and telecoms sectors, published a report criticizing the broadcaster, saying the segment “smeared the police by suggesting that the police were trash, worthless and revulsive.”

As the RTHK employees met with Leung that evening, Hong Kong’s Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, which oversees RTHK, released a statement on its website demanding that the broadcaster examine its production and editorial processes and “follow up or take disciplinary actions” on any staff found to have committed “negligence or errors.”

Nine days later, the Commerce Bureau announced an unprecedented, government-led review of RTHK’s governance and management – spanning its administration, financial control and manpower – to ensure it complies with its charter. The review is expected to be concluded by the end of the year.

A spokesman for the Commerce Bureau told Reuters in an email that RTHK has editorial independence, but as a government department, RTHK and its staff “are subject to all applicable government rules and regulations.”

“Ultimately RTHK is part of the government, and in theory it could do anything to us,” said Gladys Chiu, the chairperson of RTHK’s program staff union, which represents about 400 of the station’s 700 staff. The new legislation and increased scrutiny of RTHK could be used “to coerce the staff into broadcasting or reporting in a way that is approved by the government,” she said.

RTHK also faces pressures at street level. Small groups of pro-Beijing protesters regularly gather outside its headquarters in Kowloon, waving Chinese flags and signs accusing the broadcaster of anti-government bias.

“Shut it down,” the crowds chanted continuously during one protest in January, according to video news coverage, while calling RTHK a “cockroach” station, a description some police have used to describe pro-democracy protesters.

Some RTHK staff have been threatened in social media posts and targeted in the pro-Beijing media in Hong Kong for perceived anti-government bias. Some pro-Beijing lawmakers also routinely attack RTHK. One outspoken critic, Junius Ho, last month demanded the broadcaster become a “government mouthpiece.”

“It’s very worrying because we see RTHK being reined in by every means,” said Shirley Yam, vice chairperson of the Hong Kong Journalists Association.

RISING TENSION

China and the United States have been engaged in a tit-for-tat spat over the presence of the other’s journalists for several months.

The United States slashed the number of journalists permitted to work at Chinese state-owned media outlets in the country to 100 from 160, citing a deepening crackdown on independent reporting inside China. In March, Beijing revoked the media credentials of about a dozen American reporters working in mainland China for the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and New York Times, saying the reporters would not be allowed to relocate and work in Hong Kong.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement on the State Department’s website last month that the Chinese government “has threatened to interfere with the work of American journalists in Hong Kong,” without giving details.

A source with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters that if the row with the United States escalates further, Beijing could intervene in the issuance of work visas for foreign journalists in Hong Kong.

The spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: “Visa issues are a matter of national sovereignty. The Chinese government manages affairs related to foreign media and foreign journalists according to laws and regulations.”

Intervening in the issuance of journalists’ visas would be a highly contentious move for Hong Kong, which although part of China, operates with a high degree of autonomy. In 2018, the visa of the Financial Times’ Asia editor, Victor Mallet, was not renewed by Hong Kong after he moderated a speech by a pro-independence activist at an event hosted by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) in the city. The move alarmed some diplomats and business groups in Hong Kong.

The event angered China, and a senior official said at the time that the FCC had broken the law by hosting a “separatist.” Hong Kong authorities never publicly explained why Mallet’s visa had not been renewed, saying they could not comment on individual cases.

Hong Kong’s global media freedom ranking is in free-fall. Reporters without Borders (RSF) said Hong Kong fell to 80th place in 2020 in its global press freedom index, down from 18th in 2002. Over the past year, reporters covering protests in the city have been detained, pepper-sprayed and shot with rubber bullets and tear gas canisters by police.

“A security law dictated by China would give a massive blow to press freedom in Hong Kong,” said Cédric Alviani, the head of RSF’s East Asia bureau. “(It would) allow the regime to engage in the type of intimidation that we see on their side of the border.” (Reporting by James Pomfret and Greg Torode in Hong Kong Additional reporting by Beijing newsroom Editing by Bill Rigby)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Hong Kong's free media fears being silenced by China's national security law – The Globe and Mail

Published

on


Media mogul Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, founder of Apple Daily, speaks during an interview responding to national security legislation in Hong Kong on May 29, 2020.

TYRONE SIU/Reuters

When a team of producers at Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK) heard on May 19 that the publicly funded broadcaster planned to axe one of its most popular weekly shows, they rushed to the building next door to confront the station’s head.

A group of about 20 producers and other employees from RTHK’s TV and radio operations barged into a conference room where Leung Ka-wing, director of broadcasting, was meeting with top executives.

Some staff demanded to know why the satirical and current affairs television show “Headliner” – which had drawn official complaints after poking fun at the Hong Kong police in an episode in February – was being cancelled, and whether the move was prompted by pressure from authorities.

Story continues below advertisement

The impromptu meeting lasted about 90 minutes, during which several staffers cried and raised their voices, according to three people present. Leung said he took the decision to cancel the show in order to “protect RTHK” and its staff, according to the three people.

As conversations continued inside the conference room, RTHK announced it was suspending production of the Chinese-language show, which had been running since 1989, at the end of the current season. RTHK apologized to anyone offended by the station’s output but did not give a reason for the suspension.

Leung, 67, who made his name in broadcasting during the Tiananmen Square crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Beijing in 1989, declined to answer Reuters’ questions about the meeting. He denied making the comment about protecting RTHK, according to RTHK spokeswoman Amen Ng. Other executives in the meeting that Reuters could identify did not reply to requests for comment.

Hong Kong’s government did not comment on whether it had pressured Leung to cancel the show.

RTHK, founded in 1928 and sometimes compared to the British Broadcasting Corporation, is the only independent, publicly funded media outlet on Chinese soil. It is guaranteed editorial independence by its charter.

The cancellation of “Headliner” has prompted fear among some journalists that mounting pressure from the Hong Kong government and Beijing will destroy that independence.

Hong Kong reached boiling point last summer as millions of pro-democracy protesters took to the streets and some of them clashed violently with police, posing one of the biggest challenges to China’s leader Xi Jinping since he came to power in 2012.

Story continues below advertisement

In response to the protests, China said last month it would introduce national security legislation in Hong Kong to prohibit secession, subversion and external interference. More than a dozen people working at RTHK and other media organizations told Reuters they fear that legislation could be used to silence or shut down independent media in the territory.

The situation is like being under the blade of a guillotine, said Jimmy Lai, the publisher of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy Apple Daily newspaper, which like RTHK, has for years drawn the ire of Hong Kong’s government and Beijing: “There’s no halfway. It’s falling.”

Lai, 72, has been repeatedly denounced by state-run Beijing media and pro-China media in Hong Kong, painting him as the local face of what they describe as a U.S. interference campaign. He has been arrested twice this year on charges of illegal assembly related to protests last year.

Lai and some other members of the media fear the new legislation – which has not yet been set out in detail – will make Hong Kong more like mainland China, where the ruling Communist Party runs or controls the vast majority of media and routinely censors dissenting views. The country imprisoned at least 48 journalists last year, more than any other country, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Hong Kong’s leader Carrie Lam has denied the new legislation would curtail media freedom, saying last month that “freedom of expression, freedom of protest, freedom of journalism, will stay.” Hong Kong is guaranteed freedom of speech and the press under Article 27 of the Basic Law, the miniconstitution agreed by China when it took back control of former British colony in 1997.

A spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs told Reuters the proposed legislation “only targets activities related to subversion, separatism, terrorism and foreign interference into Hong Kong affairs,” and that it will “not affect freedom of speech, media freedoms, or any other rights and freedoms.”

Story continues below advertisement

China’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong, Beijing’s official base in the city, did not reply to requests for comment on whether China sought to control or suppress RTHK or if the new national security legislation would curtail media freedom in Hong Kong.

UNDER THE MICROSCOPE

Scrutiny of RTHK has increased dramatically since late February, when a two-minute segment on “Headliner” entitled ‘Police Farce Report’ showed an actor dressed as a Hong Kong police officer standing inside a large rubbish container with his hands covered in plastic.

The skit shows police in various situations wearing biohazard suits and masks, satirizing how well equipped police officers are compared to medical workers. The actor, Kwong Ngai-yee, told Reuters the idea was based on the “Sesame Street” puppet Oscar the Grouch and that he hoped to “ease public anger through humour.”

Hong Kong police were not amused. The force’s commissioner Chris Tang complained to Leung in writing in early March, saying the show “smeared the police and their work during the coronavirus period.” RTHK had “reversed right and wrong, and we simply can’t accept it,” Tang wrote in the letter, which was made public by RTHK.

On the morning of May 19, Hong Kong’s Communications Authority, which regulates the city’s broadcast and telecoms sectors, published a report criticizing the broadcaster, saying the segment “smeared the police by suggesting that the police were trash, worthless and revulsive.”

As the RTHK employees met with Leung that evening, Hong Kong’s Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, which oversees RTHK, released a statement on its website demanding that the broadcaster examine its production and editorial processes and “follow up or take disciplinary actions” on any staff found to have committed “negligence or errors.”

Story continues below advertisement

Nine days later, the Commerce Bureau announced an unprecedented, government-led review of RTHK’s governance and management – spanning its administration, financial control and manpower – to ensure it complies with its charter. The review is expected to be concluded by the end of the year.

A spokesman for the Commerce Bureau told Reuters in an e-mail that RTHK has editorial independence, but as a government department, RTHK and its staff “are subject to all applicable government rules and regulations.”

“Ultimately RTHK is part of the government, and in theory it could do anything to us,” said Gladys Chiu, the chairperson of RTHK’s program staff union, which represents about 400 of the station’s 700 staff. The new legislation and increased scrutiny of RTHK could be used “to coerce the staff into broadcasting or reporting in a way that is approved by the government,” she said.

RTHK also faces pressures at street level. Small groups of pro-Beijing protesters regularly gather outside its headquarters in Kowloon, waving Chinese flags and signs accusing the broadcaster of anti-government bias.

“Shut it down,” the crowds chanted continuously during one protest in January, according to video news coverage, while calling RTHK a “cockroach” station, a description some police have used to describe pro-democracy protesters.

Some RTHK staff have been threatened in social media posts and targeted in the pro-Beijing media in Hong Kong for perceived anti-government bias. Some pro-Beijing lawmakers also routinely attack RTHK. One outspoken critic, Junius Ho, last month demanded the broadcaster become a “government mouthpiece.”

Story continues below advertisement

“It’s very worrying because we see RTHK being reined in by every means,” said Shirley Yam, vice chairperson of the Hong Kong Journalists Association.

RISING TENSION

China and the United States have been engaged in a tit-for-tat spat over the presence of the other’s journalists for several months.

The United States slashed the number of journalists permitted to work at Chinese state-owned media outlets in the country to 100 from 160, citing a deepening crackdown on independent reporting inside China. In March, Beijing revoked the media credentials of about a dozen American reporters working in mainland China for the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and New York Times, saying the reporters would not be allowed to relocate and work in Hong Kong.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement on the State Department’s website last month that the Chinese government “has threatened to interfere with the work of American journalists in Hong Kong,” without giving details.

A source with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters that if the row with the United States escalates further, Beijing could intervene in the issuance of work visas for foreign journalists in Hong Kong.

The spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: “Visa issues are a matter of national sovereignty. The Chinese government manages affairs related to foreign media and foreign journalists according to laws and regulations.”

Story continues below advertisement

Intervening in the issuance of journalists’ visas would be a highly contentious move for Hong Kong, which although part of China, operates with a high degree of autonomy. In 2018, the visa of the Financial Times’ Asia editor, Victor Mallet, was not renewed by Hong Kong after he moderated a speech by a pro-independence activist at an event hosted by the Foreign Correspondents Club (FCC) in the city. The move alarmed some diplomats and business groups in Hong Kong.

The event angered China, and a senior official said at the time that the FCC had broken the law by hosting a “separatist.” Hong Kong authorities never publicly explained why Mallet’s visa had not been renewed, saying they could not comment on individual cases.

Hong Kong’s global media freedom ranking is in free-fall. Reporters without Borders (RSF) said Hong Kong fell to 80th place in 2020 in its global press freedom index, down from 18th in 2002. Over the past year, reporters covering protests in the city have been detained, pepper-sprayed and shot with rubber bullets and tear gas canisters by police.

“A security law dictated by China would give a massive blow to press freedom in Hong Kong,” said Cédric Alviani, the head of RSF’s East Asia bureau. “(It would) allow the regime to engage in the type of intimidation that we see on their side of the border.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Changes being made to Saskatchewan print media as focus shifts online – Global News

Published

on


Both the Leader-Post and The Star Phoenix will not be printing a Monday copy of the paper starting on June 22nd.

The media outlets will move to a digital-only edition and will produce the printed edition Tuesday through Sunday.


READ MORE:
‘We’re back’: new Saskatoon community paper hits newsstands next week

Mark Taylor, the head of the school of journalism department at the University of Regina says, this change is not a surprising one.

“I think it’s part of a gradual shift that we are seeing lots of other newspapers doing and if this works and goes over without too many problems, it might be Tuesday, Wednesday, until eventually the paper is completely online,” Taylor said.

Readers will have access to the online version, which is the exact same version as the printed one.

Story continues below advertisement

Taylor added that the papers might see some push back from the older demographic of readers who are not online.


READ MORE:
LISTEN: The future of print media and journalism in the digital age

“I feel for the people like my parents and I think a lot of older readers who get the hard copy,” Taylor said.

“They always have and they might not be real web-savvy and they don’t want to get their news online.”

There will be no change in the subscription price.






1:56
Lacombe Globe set to print newspaper’s final edition


Lacombe Globe set to print newspaper’s final edition

© 2020 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending