The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Newspapers should be made online

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
RNG_REKT has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/30/2016 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 151 times Debate No: 93252
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




Save the paper, the ink, and the money!


Before I begin, I would like to thank my humble opponent for starting this challenge.

Additionally, I'd like to ask if the resolved (Newspapers should be made online) means "Newspapers should ONLY be made online." My following arguments will be based upon that assumption, due to the fact that it will be too difficult to create an argument if the resolved was "SOME newspapers should be made online."
Also, I will admit that I read my news online. However, my opinion and habits should NOT be one of your arguments, nor should it be associated with any of your contentions. Failure to comply with my burdens will result in your forfeiture. Thank you.

First of all, I would like to say that many of the paper newspapers are far more accessible than the newspapers than the ones on the Internet. Now, I know what you are probably thinking: "What a f**cking idiot! It's on the Internet; of course it's more accessible than a paper newspaper!" However, think about the people without the access to a smartphone. About 1/3 of the population (of US) does not have a smartphone or other easily accessible connection to the Internet. If you wanted to get news, but you had little access to the Internet, where would you get news? If all newspapers were online, where would you get information about ISIS, or Trump, or sports? Any way you put it, it would be very inconvenient to get the news without a smartphone.

Additionally, the people without Internet access would just need to pay $1.50, and then they would get the newspaper. The newspaper (paper) contains all the important news, and it goes into details. Plus it has comics! Some of today's online newspapers are unreliable and incomplete, and looking at the news online is inconvenient and irritating. Instead of reading about the polls or the newest terrorist attack, you get bombarded with ads that are stupid and/or immodest. I personally don't give a f**k about 95% of the things that pop up on the screen when I want to read the news! I just wanted to read about the latest stupid thing that Trump said, but due to the inconvenience and stupidity of modern-day mobile newspapers, I find that searching for news online is saddening and irritating.

Furthermore, I would like to make the point that newspapers are not as resource-consuming "entities" as you seem to believe. Instead, many of the newspapers today are made from recycled and environmentally friendly resources. In fact, it is estimated that about 210 million trees per year are saved by recycling for newspapers! Newspapers might feel *a little* heavy, but much of that weight comes from an oily substance that covers the newspaper, not the actual paper. That's why the paper is so thin on a newspaper. Also, by paying for these supplies, it helps the economy and things!

Lastly, newspapers have swag and chill. This isn't much of an argument, but I'll introduce it anyway. I have yet to see a movie where the old guy looks up information/news on his phone. Nope, he always sits on a chair and then reads a PAPER newspaper. It's one of the most cliche movie themes that I have seen. In fact, if you see a movie in which the old person reads a phone for his news, you should tell me. It would be life changing.

Thank you for your time and consideration, judges and debater.
Debate Round No. 1


Yes, the main point is that "All newspapers should be made online". I will be arguing they should be online while you will be arguing all of them should remain paper.
You say 1/3 of the population don't have smart phones or "easily accessible" connection. You forget that pc's, tablets and other electronic gadgets are still not dead. Moreover, you don't have any source to back this up, neither have you defined your terms. If by "easily accessible" connection your survey meant that it was 2g, then it doesn't count as I am still using a wifi with 500 kb/s speed, which is quite low.
Furthermore, you forget the issues in the paper newspaper as well. Suppose if the delivery transport got stuck in a traffic jam, or the company's driver met an accident. Where would you get your news then? In the internet, you can easily find a place with wifi and get it once more, but in the newspaper you would have to wait till the next day.
As for pop-up ads, I am sure news companies can be satisfied by keeping the normal ads that they have in the paper format, such as a product's advertisement or property dealers. There should be no pop-up ads, and this aspect depends entirely on the company and developer. Small banner ads are a more subtle and tolerable form of ads.
1.5 dollar is the price of the internet according to you, yet a monthly newspaper bill costs about the same or a little more, I think. At my place the bill is 2.25 dollars. Now, we can see which is cheaper. An ad-free version can be developed as well.
Moreover, you said "I just wanted to read about the latest stupid thing that Trump said" developers could easily invest time and develop a search engine once online is the only medium. You can't do that so fast in a newspaper, turning pages and scanning with our ordinary human eyes.
210 million trees that are "saved" were supposed to be cut down for newspapers! So, in fact you saved nothing! It's like I have a cake that I have to eat, but instead I find yesterday's leftovers and eat them, therefore I save the cake! It is just delaying the inevitable. Another point to add is that not all newspaper companies are environment-friendly. This depends entirely on the company's' management, funds and locality. And that oily substance must be some overly used up resource as well, and you haven't rebutted ink. Save paper and slow down global warming!
Trees used up
In addition to that, I found out this source that claims that the Sunday newspaper of the US uses up 500,000 trees everyday. Do I need to do the math? We will be saving all those trees if we stop paper production.
Cool factor
Firing my fusion cannon has a lot of cool too, yet we all know it isn't good. As for the old man reading newspaper, may I remind you that during his time there were no online mediums, and he finds it unnecessary to learn when his time on this Earth is nearly over. Furthermore, once paper production is stopped, the cool will fade off. And for those old school people, they can easily print it out at home if they wish to. We can't stop people from all that stuff, now can we?
Many newspapers are constricted to a region, such as Delhi times to Delhi and Times of India to India. Online, it could be shared around the world to all the curious viewers out there. It would also dramatically reduce transport cost, for there will be no more manual labor. Lesser Printing machines and offices would be needed as well.
Some newspapers come only in English, and others in the regional language. All these newspapers have different content. Online, we could have a flimsy but useful translation of the article.
Faster connection with the audience
In the case of newspapers, we have to wait until the next day to get the recent news, but with online reporting, we would have it instantly, as soon as the reporter writes it, it will be there.
Sometimes newspaper articles can't be too long as there is a limit to the number of pages a newspaper has. But there shall be no such limit on online newspaper apps. Furthermore, if I miss out on some issue and I lost the paper/dropped water on it, I would have to contact the archives to get it and pay extra. But online, everything is stored forever and I can easily have a look of the 2016 issue (in 2050) for history projects or simply remembering the old times.
People can react to different articles online, such as questioning the article's validity or expressing support for it/disapproval. With the paper, you can only contact the reporting agencies or discuss with nearby readers, which is not a great audience, as it is hard to put in all the efforts to find and contact the journalists, and it doesn't seem very realistic when you go up to a neighbor's home asking if he read the article in the newspaper. Online, a comment and like/dislike section could be easily made and discussions about these issues start taking place.
This is one of the longest arguments I have wrote, please don't crush it fully (this is also an opinion, not to be rebutted)


Good debate
I was unable to find any rebuttal
You are a good debater, I must admit
But the current topic was too hard to debate against, regardless of our skill
You are good, though
Have fun
Also, if it is possible, I'd like to see if you could come up with any new arguments from my point of view.
Debate Round No. 2


Con has conceded, so I can take this debate to my win section.
Now, I hope there's no strike back in round 3.
Thank you for this fun debate. Trust me, there are much better debaters than me on this site, and I am but an amateur.
I also had done this debate before (on this site only, of course) so I guess I had more time.
This is my other debate which was similar to this, for all the source needers out there-
As for arguments for your side, I would have brought up the eyesight point and electricity consumption, but then they could have been rebutted by pointing out paper also reduces blink rate and that printers utilize electricity.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by lord_megatron 3 months ago
who froze the timer??
Posted by lord_megatron 3 months ago
@Wayward writer I am not sure you understand my model of online newspaper. I read all comics online, therefore it must not be difficult to get it up on newspapers. As for smartphones wifi, if you are not at home and want to read, where to buy it from? This is not the 1900's that you will have newspaper stands present. It won't impact jobs at all, as they would be working online now.
Plus, paper newspaper are costlier than an internet connection, and a smartphone is not bought only for a newspaper app.
I agree many people don't have electronic devices, but the resolution is "newspapers SHOULD be made online, not WOULD" therefore it is more idealistic than realistic.
Posted by TheWaywardWriter 3 months ago
I believe it would be a better solution if those who have smartphones immediately unsubscribed to paper newspapers as they do not have the need for it, whereas people who don't own electronic gadgets (yes, they do exist) should be able to have it. Paper can be saved while there are still more employment opportunities for other jobs in the newspaper.
Posted by TheWaywardWriter 3 months ago
So far, I go for Con. Although I support Pro's ideas to save paper, ink, and money, paper newspapers are more accessible. It's way cheaper to get a paper newspaper than a smartphone, where you'd get access to the internet. Plus, what would happen to the jobs of the people who contribute to the newspaper? As Con pointed out, comics are only present in paper newspapers. No more funny political cartoons and less job opportunities for the comic artists.

Anyway, newspapers have swag and chill.
Posted by lord_megatron 3 months ago
@Amdelexius wouldn't online profit-making schemes account for the loss in economy?
@side_spectator thanks for that point, credit for one of my arguments goes to you
Posted by TheSideSpectator 3 months ago
RNG REKT, where are your sources?
Posted by Amedexyius 3 months ago
I'm willing to accept this argument, although, the magnitude of this debate may be higher than you think. There are economic factors to this argument.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.