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

Social media should replace newspapers

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
kk1112003 has forfeited round #2.
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: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 511 times Debate No: 93229
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




Save the paper, the ink and the money!


"If we lose the journalist, we have to stop and think: Are the times really changing? Or, as the rest of the world watches, are we dumbing ourselves down?" -Ruby Perez
Debate Round No. 1


Journalists can use social media to report their findings. Here is my argument in detail-
Saving ink and paper
Social media won't require ink and paper, newspapers use up a lot of resources daily. If production of newspapers is stopped, there will be lesser deforestation and lesser global warming. Lesser printing machines, transports and offices would be utilized as well.
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 social media reporting news, we would have it instantly, as soon as the reporter writes it, it remains online.
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.
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 social media.
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.
People can react to different articles on social media, 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 and start talking about the newspaper.
All newspaper agencies must stop production and go online on social media. On social media they can use their usual ads to generate revenue or charge the viewers for premium content/full articles.
Waiting for con's rebuttals.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by lord_megatron 2 years ago
who froze the time limit/???
Posted by lord_megatron 2 years ago
@side_spectator yeah that's what I wanted to debate, but for some reason I wrote social media instead. I have created a new debate which will talk about bringing newspapers online and ending the paper version.
Posted by TheSideSpectator 2 years ago
You could also save ink and paper by reading online newspapers.
Posted by lord_megatron 2 years ago
If the politics pertain to the US, then no
Posted by Amedexyius 2 years ago
I'm willing to accept this debate although I warn you, debates like these are actually REALLY impacting to a society. This means I'd be using economics and politics in this debate and I notice a lot of your debates are philosophical and based on what you believe/ideals. If you are looking for an economic/political debate, please tell me so I can accept and we will be on the same page in the debate.
This debate has 2 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.