Have you changed the way you get your news?

Chances are pretty good that you have, thanks to the internet, cable news and other advances in technology. But new technology isn’t the only reason news consumers are making different choices. The perception that their traditional news sources have changed – become more biased, less trustworthy or more sensational – spur many readers and viewers to find alternate sources for at least some of their news.

A couple of recent reports were released that provide statistical and empirical support for this emerging trend:

A Pew Internet & American Life Project report Wednesday said 50 million Americans obtain news online on an average day, ``a new high-water mark for online news-gathering that coincides with rapid growth of broadband adoption in American homes.''

The third annual State of the News Media offers a comprehensive look at the state of American journalism. The 2006 report found the “problems of the news media have worsened,” and “with that we get a stronger sense than in earlier years that the news industry is beginning to move into the next era—especially to the Internet.”

A much less scientific survey echoed these findings and offers an interesting glimpse at the local view of a national trend. We sent an email query to the 3,000 people who have signed up on our Web site to be part of our News Network. We send emails occasionally to these people to seek their input on stories we’re covering or reaction to recent events. This time we asked the question that led this post: Have you changed the way you get your news?

More than 100 people replied and, given the pool of active news readers we’re drawing from, I wasn’t surprised by an overwhelming number of affirmative responses. For every one reader who proudly claimed that they were sticking with their old habits, 10 readers described how they used RSS feeds on customized portal sites like MyYahoo and Google to read a diverse collection of news, received email news alerts via email or on cell phones, found bloggers who cut through the bias they felt prevent accurate reports in traditional media.

Many talked about how important the morning newspaper remained to them, like this Marci Spear. She wouldn’t say she has changed, but her news consumption has been “enhanced.” She still takes the “actual” newspaper, (is the online version fake?) watches TV news and gets news updates, emails stories to friends and enjoys getting the “whole story.”

Laura Nole, meanwhile, just likes the speed.

Like most Americans I have come to expect instant everything. So, if I want to know what is happening anywhere in the world, I can just turn on my computer any time of the day or night. If something interests me, I can do a quick search to find out more without getting ink on my fingers. It is so much easier to delve into a topic on the internet than to search through the paper. If asked this question a year ago, I would have insisted reading the news was the only way to go. Gotta go with the flow.

Not everyone is ready to ditch the paper for the Web, of course. But most readers, including Dan Johnson, recognize the power that both resources – combined – provide them.

There's really no good substitute for an old-fashioned, low-tech newspaper with a bowl of cereal at the breakfast table, for local news and national headlines. But there's no substitute for the Internet when it comes to getting the real scoop on national and world events that the mainstream media is not allowed to print. Without the Internet, most of us would still be blissfully ignorant.

This comment was echoed by many. Seems that a local newspaper like the TNT, or even the Seattle papers, doesn’t offer the kind of comprehensive and "unbiased" national and world news report that readers are looking for. Lots of people said they read the TNT (in print or online) for local news and sports but went elsewhere for national and world news.

So what does this tell us? As readers change, newspapers and news Web sites need to change with them.