Some things just don’t work online, and certainly don’t work on small screens – especially anything with rich photography, or for which page-flicking is the best access method.

It’s conspicuous that Wired still publishes a print version – you’d expect things like that to be on the bleeding edge of digitalisation, given its tech-savvy readership.

Dean (who still buys Time Out, Wired, Evo & New Scientist in print versions…..)

Print products are not going to disappear – more books and magazines are being sold than every before, more paper is being printed offices than ever before.

It’s clear the magazine is in decline for the print version. It’s also clear they’ve taken a while to get their listings up to speed online. And until recently I was a paid subscriber.

I think there is still value in a print format – in this age of endless information, editorial is important. And Time Out is well written, informative and reminds you about aspects of London that other publications, online or otherwise, wouldn’t cover.

I’m also troubled by the wholesale move to digital. I know it’s inevitable and I’m one of those who embraces digital media. But I still know a lot of people who don’t embrace digital media and probably never will, or never will to the extent that you or I use digital media today even, let alone how we may use it 5 years hence.

I look at my parents, who find it increasingly difficult to book holidays, flights and the like because they’re not online. They’ll never get the best deals unless I, or my siblings, do the searching for them.

Their local paper is their only source of what’s going on locally. Without it, they’d never know.

Equally, their daily delivered newspaper is their lifeline – the daily crossword is a must-do and both my parents still read the newspaper cover to cover. My mother regularly saves cuttings for me that she thinks will be of interest to me. And she’s always right in her choice (obviously!).

So what happens to these people while we go through our digital transition (which may take years yet – even in the relatively tech-savvy UK)? And if information sources like this are *only* on digital, then who protects the consumer from being cut-off from their digital supply, be that via mobile or fixed line(for whatever reason)?

Buying a newspaper now and then, watching TV for free (subject to buying a TV set), or checking stuff on teletext in order to participate in society is easy, cheap and does not require a contract, proof of income, nor proof of identity. It’s also convenient, you can dip in and out at will and no-one else in the world need know what you’re reading about or when.

This is very unlike the digital scenario. Typically a contract is needed (even if it’s a 30 day rolling contract). This means form-filling, proof of identity, credit checks etc and this is simply too much still for many people in the UK, let alone anywhere else.

The recent Joseph Rowntree Foundation stated that in order to participate in society, a mobile phone was essential. I reckon broadband will be essential in their next report.
http://www.jrf.org.uk/pressroom/releases/010708.asp
It hasn’t exactly taken long for a mobile phone to be a fundamental part of our lives.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a strong supporter of all things digital and I lap up digital media myself. Not everyone does though. The UK’s population is getting older. As you get older, dexterity, concentration span, visual acuity and hearing all decline and sometimes the print version of something is just better. I’d rather carry a newspaper around than a laptop for example.

So I’m wondering if we’re properly assessing the price the undigerati (like my parents, or the low-waged, or those who can’t get credit) will have to pay for us to have our digital way. And I wonder if the digital divide will be crossed well enough for everyone to participate fully? And I wonder if, in the future, certain print publications will need to be subsidised to cross that digital chasm?