newspapers will,totally be gone by 2112. The internet has taken over. Life changes everyday be prepared for a new life

I prefer newspapers to internet news because it's usually more in depth and personalized coverage. I become comfortable with reading the newspaper with my morning coffee; I don't think I could do that with the internet.

Newspapers that cover their market well, challenge readers with solid editorial content instead of 'generic' news that the web had the day before will be successful.

I believe people who do not read newspapers are missing out on a great deal of information which is not available anywhere else. Sports coverage is extensive. Business news coverage is extensive. Stock, bond and mutual fund prices are reported in detail. The editorial and op-ed pages contain rich information. Automobile sections, home sections, lawn and garden sections, food and health sections, etc. are all covered in detail.

The daily news is covered in detail.

The above information and more is covered in a well-written, accurate and understandable manner. This cannot be said for the Internet, where unknown bloggers print articles which may or may not be accurate.

A newspaper can be read at leisure over a cup of coffee. The reader can return to reread articles of interest. A newspaper is a great resource and if it is lost due to disinterest or readers, it will be sorely missed.

The newspaper's disadvantages are 1) lag time...press to delivery; and 2) a very large waste product. What newspapers need to do is supply readers with a projection device and a wireless keyboard and printing capability so a person can relax in an easy chair and read the paper on a large screen which can be shared with others. A search engine could look for readers preferences in news and advertising and the printer could print their coupons. Elimination of the paper product with its logistics should save enough money to return the papers to profitability while making the news current to real time.

The newspaper can be kept alive. All they need to do is transmit the front page electronically rather than in paper format. The New York Times has an image of their final edition available on-line. The resolution of the words in the articles isn't good enough to read the articles however. You can see the headlines. They do this to reduce download time.

I've been publishing a local community newspaper for 17 years in the San Francisco area and it always receives high marks from readers. I'd like to finally retire and would like to sell it if anyone out there is interested in investing in a lively, interesting, successful monthly community paper. Contact WEST OF TWIN PEAKS OBSERVER.

#5 - First thing I could say is "Huh?"

The news is much more extensive online. With more photos, video, and links to compliment the article. Also, there are so many times when I read an article in the SJ Mercury or LA Times with a notation at the end directing to their website for further "in depth" news on the subject.

More accurate? Now you can't compare professional journalist to some blogger typing away on his Q between lunch breaks. But I don't see how you can say the paper is more accurate than, let's say, CNN.com.

I do agree with you that reading a paper over coffee is something that the internet can't emulate yet and I do feel that if newspapers were to become extinct, I hope they survive via online. Because its important to have a local source for news.

Who has time to read anything in depth? The little time I have to read news I much rather spend on reading headlines on Yahoo news, and reading (much) more if I am interested, than on reading a full story in a cumbersome, wastefull & outdated (old news) newspaper.
I work with computers for a living and sometimes have to wait half a minute or so for the computer to be done, which is perfect to switch to 'myyahoo' page and read several headlines or one story. Try doing that with a large newspaper.

And let's face it 99.9% of all the 'news' doesn't affect us directly and/or immediately anyway. If it is going to be relevant for my everyday life (e.g. voting, local construction) then I typically will have read several short stories on in the days before it becomes relevant.

By the way watching news on TV is even worse because you don't get to choose the subjects your are interested in and can't skip the commercials, except if you have a TIVO.