Journalistic crystal ball gazing
December 30, 2019 11:29 AM   Subscribe

At the end of every year, NiemanLab asks "some of the smartest people we know" to provide predictions about what's ahead for journalism in the next year. Here's this year's crop. (90 posts so far, more are still being added.)

Wanna see how things turned out for prior year prediction sets? Check out predictions for 2019. 2018. 2017. 2016. 2015.
posted by beagle (6 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite
Can anyone with knowledge of this area comment on the quality of past predictions? Does Nieman ever look back on these? I looked at a few to figure out whether this year’s are worth thinking about, but it’s a lot “we have to think about impact” type stuff that doesn’t seem to make any prediction at all beyond expressing the contributor’s hopes.
posted by migurski at 11:37 AM on December 30, 2019 [3 favorites]

I should have added that, as migurski noted, most of these are not really objectively measurable predictions, and some of them are more in the nature of observations than predictions. Still, overall they are a reflection of where some well-placed observers think journalism is heading, or should be heading.
posted by beagle at 11:45 AM on December 30, 2019

Well this from the for-2015 edition certainly bore out, stripping off the euphemisms.
posted by PMdixon at 11:47 AM on December 30, 2019 [1 favorite]

2014. 2013. 2012. 2011.
posted by BiggerJ at 5:24 PM on December 30, 2019

Eric Zorn, in 2010, on 2020. It's a little eerie.
posted by WCityMike at 6:29 PM on December 30, 2019 [2 favorites]

“In day-to-day political reporting, the Times is hopelessly stuck in the past. Its proud allegiance to presenting ‘both sides’ in a time of political breakdown renders it a handmaiden to the degradation of truth.” - GENEVA OVERHOLSER

posted by gottabefunky at 1:17 PM on January 2, 2020

« Older Ma jeunesse ne fut qu'un ténébreux...   |   VLA on the move Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments