Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism announced in its State of the News Media Monday that more people now — for the first time — get their news online than in newspapers.

“Fully 46% of people now say they get news online at least three times a week, surpassing newspapers (40%) for the first time,” according to the organization. “Only local TV news is a more popular platform in America now (50%).”

TV undoubtedly also will fade in the next several years as online video becomes more popular with the younger generations.

Another vital point in the study, though, is mobile. It states that, according to a study produced by Project for Excellence in Journalism with Pew Internet and American Life Project, “nearly half of all Americans (47%) now get some form of local news on a mobile device.”

It also emphasizes that “every media sector is losing audience now except online.” The findings cite that CNN has tanked 37 percent with viewership. FOX followed with an 11 percent decline.

While the study states, though, that local TV was the leader in the 2010 “revenue race,” that likely will change as mobile and online markets dominate within the next five years.

Most of the older generations likely still rely on television — and newspapers — for their news because that’s what they grew up watching and reading. Now, with pre-teens having iPhones and BlackBerry devices, the norm will be to obtain, report and transfer news via these devices — after all, that’s the inevitable future.

The London Daily Telegraph reports The Box, a modern coffee shop in Split, a Mediterranean city in the country’s south, has dumped newspapers for iPads.

This move sparks a continual decline for the struggling in-print newspaper business — especially as more cultural hangouts start to go paperless.

Sure, some people might argue that it’s just a hyped-up cyber cafe, but the reality is: It’s a trend-setting presence in the world of digital news. The Box’s transition, ultimately, continues to force news agencies to think of unique apps and unique ways to convey news to readers because they want it instantly at their fingertips — and with no black residue.

The study states that while millennials continue to be the dominant online generation, “Gen X and older cohorts are more likely than Millennials to engage in several online activities,” according to Pew.

The study continues to state that online activities, such as e-mail, search engine use, getting news, online banking and downloading podcasts, “are becoming more uniformly popular across all age groups.”

For the newspaper business, this is another troubling sign as the older generation is their prime readership. As younger generations grow up with online news, when they get older, they’re not picking up newspapers.

The Pew study doesn’t necessarily state that older generations are dumping newspapers for online news, but it’s a troubling sign for the industry.

The study goes on to state that blogging among millennials has decreased (citing social media as a possible cause), but that blogging among older generations is on the rise.

This is interesting because it further proves the point of interaction with news. Older generations that read newspaper are starting to realize they can’t do much with it except fill out the crossword puzzle. Now, with a larger number of older people blogging, I think, they’ve started to understand interactivity, such as comments.

As such, adaptation still is vital for struggling news outlets — in particular newspapers — as they continue to fight free content and online mobility.

The study further proves this point with the jump in online video viewing. It states that in May 2008, “52 percent of adult Internet users watched video online.” In May 2010, that number rose to 66 percent. It shows a progression for news agencies that newspapers and television stations are missing — there’s no longer a need for those two mediums. Instead, it’s an online, instant world. And it’s one older generations now are realizing.

Read the study here.

Book description: Newspapers today are dying. In fact, the death rattle of all print media distinctly is audible as newsrooms quickly are turning into funeral homes. Journalism is morphing from a brick and mortar environment to a handheld phenomenon. Netbooks, PDAs and cell phones are where all major stories are breaking. The news business is trying quickly to catch up in a field where the last major paradigm shift was the PC/Internet revolution. Now, with iPhones, BlackBerry devices, digital cameras, video devices and Web sites at the touch of a button, anyone can break a story and distribute it worldwide with a cell phone.

This test, a partnership with the University of California at Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism, is another defining moment in the transition of news.

We’ve all known for years YouTube is where we post videos of poor college decision. But, it wasn’t long until news outlets learned they could use the tool as a way of reaching audiences. YouTube’s CitizenTube is an excellent example of exploiting this content.

The YouTube news feed will help instantly aggregate breaking news videos uploaded to the site from anyone — an ingenious idea. The question now is, how many news outlets will give it a try or how many will worry more about viewers leaving their site for YouTube?

The latter is not the point of this project. One point, however, is if someone is interested in a video on this feed, they will click back into your site — maybe finding more information and potentially become a “loyal reader” — an unlikely term in an HhJ world. In the HhJ world, the idea is that readers want more information, faster.

As the disruption of the broadsheet paradigm continues, more newspapers, magazines and Internet-based information companies will cast an incredibly wide net for content from PJs and CJs alike. In the HhJ paradigm, the entity’s editor is like a content manager, and that editor will need to be extremely facile in understanding that there will be multiple “plug-ins” for all kinds of content that never would have seen the light of day in the broadsheets.

Fast, locally focused content from multiple sources, backed by multiple photo and video providers, will rule this exciting new frontier. There will be huge opportunities for PJs and CJs and the editor aggregators. This will be a 24/7 opportunity that will feel like a runaway train to everyone involved.

This idea is something news outlets could attempt on their own by creating a similiar aggregation feed of CJ- and freelance PJ-submitted content that people can tag and then will play under stories if it’s relatable.

It even could be an app — one that updates throughout the day and shows the videos categorized under the day’s stories. For example, if there was a rally at the statehouse, viewers could submit their video, story or photo, tag it as “SHrally,” submit it, it shows under the original SHrally story on the website and then pushes to the app under a similar headline.

CitizenTube is moving into this territory, I think, but at a national level. As content becomes more localized, there will be an incredible need to show and to express opinions and news on local topics covered by local news agencies.

To players who accommodate the PJs and the CJs in the fastest and most user-friendly presentation will win the viewers.

After all, it will be those multiple sources stories that help get the most comprehensive information to the public. Not to mention attracting the eyeballs (aka more cash from advertisers).

The new iPhone 4, displayed Monday at the Worldwide Developers Conference (available June 24), has all the features any journalist (CJ or PJ) needs to never again be in a newsroom.

Of these features include FaceTime, the ability for video calling (right now just WiFi capable) is a feat that will put an end to mobile video cameras such as the FlipCam, which could not even transmit data remotely.

Imagine using this new technology in the field as a reporter from a scene and dialing in to a website or central newsroom to show you reporting live as action is happening around you.

Another is the overall video capabilities of the phone itself. No more is there a need for a film crew or bulky cameras for on-the-spot news. Point, shoot, edit, send. Seamless. This is possible and will be the future. High school and college students will use this technology to enhance their newspapers’ websites as schools cut back on their budgets. Professional journalists and bloggers will do the same. And for the same reason.

The gyroscope built into the new device also is a feature worth exploiting for maps and geocoding of news for both the consumer and the producer.

The iAd feature is something news outlets also will need to investigate as they construct more apps that benefit the consumer and keep those same consumers within the app, rather than taking them to a random site. That also means more cash as it can display videos, demos and, essentially, offer twice as much interactive ad space than in print or on television.

With this new phone, we will begin to see other companies compete as they start to exploit the trend of smaller, faster and better. We also will see more citizen journalists take to the streets with this device (and other future versions of it) to re-define journalism.

The broadsheets would do well to jump on this train asap. Every newspaper should equip all of their reporters, but it should not stop there. There has to be macro-coordination throughout the news organization so that information and images travel seamlessly from the event to the editor to the public. This will not work with the “let’s wait and see if it gets popular.” Note: it’s already popular.

Evolve or die.

As media quickly is being consumed by technology and journalists are becoming more entrepreneurial, the wave of the future lies with initiatives that are worth taking risks—i.e. Twitter, Facebook, instant photo feeds, blogs, mobile technology, apps, advertising tags…

A new startup founded by Burt Herman, an Associated Press reporter, known as “Hacks/Hackers,” is at the forefront of merging journalists and technologists to create a think tank of new media.

“We’re trying to save journalism, not newspapers,” he told me during a recent book interview.

That’s the point a lot of people are missing. It’s common knowledge that news print won’t be around much longer. I know pressmen who’ve told me, “I won’t have a job in 10 years.” And they’re right.

Marc Andreessen, the co-founder of Netscape, said in 2009 that news organizations need to “shut down the printing presses tomorrow” to handle the economic changes.

The future is in digital—not in print. News people know this. It’s been told to them for years, but a lot still take a “wait and see, where’s my pension” position.

In November 2009, two former journalists in the Detroit area (Mark and Gary Stern), attempted to create a daily print newspaper, “The Detroit Daily Press,” since every other paper in that area had scaled back. It was put on hold that year, then revived again in January. They failed in less than a week and shut down the operation. They, however, took a risk, but followed the failing paradigm of the soon-to-be-extinct broadsheets.

That spirit of risk taking needs to be supported more at newspapers and television stations across the country (and even around the world) with “new media.” John Paton, CEO of the Journal Register Co., took a risk with The Ben Franklin Project. The experiment was to find only free ways to produce two newspapers online and in print with the credo being, “Digital First, Print Last.” The project, called a “success,” will be implemented at all the Journal Register Co. newspapers by July 4.

What Paton’s project demonstrates to industrialized journalism is the ability to not take a backseat approach to a rapidly changing news business. How long will it last? I don’t know. And I’m guessing neither does he, but he’s willing to take the chance if it means he saves money and the company can produce a better-quality product for the people.

As the newspaper industry continues to take the “wait and see” attitude, we’re going to see more and more news outlet morgues. And, as we see what other news outlets have done and say it doesn’t work, we quickly label their initiative as a failure and use them as an example of why we shouldn’t do it either. This, instead, should mean that it just can be done better.

Technologists and geeky computer nerds are inventing such ideas as those mentioned before (and tons more that are out there) and, as a result, they are the ones who are shaping the future of news. It’s not the old editor who’s done it the same way for 40 years so it has to be done that way—it’s the young, talented, computer-savvy, non-newsy individual who is leading this new paradigm.

Editors: Take the risk and allow reporters to have individual Twitter accounts that post instant news copy and photos. Allow photographers to snap photos and have it shoot straight to the Web in real time. Take a chance on creating an app that’s unique and not just RSS feeds of content that anyone can get off of a mobile news site. Forget the eight chains of editors for certain news stories.

Taking those risks will allow for innovation and expand the realm of “new media” that could bring in more revenue. If we are to save journalism, as Herman said, we must take the actions—and the risks that accompany them—to sail into the unknown. It might work, it might not. But one thing is for certain: the smart money (when available) is seeking out journalistic innovation, not being poured into traditional media.

And, for the first time, the industry is embracing the paradigm of HhJ.

The project, called a “success,” will be implemented at all the Journal Register Co.’s daily newspapers by July 4.

What Paton’s project demonstrates to industrialized journalism is the ability to not take a back seat approach to a rapidly changing news business. Too many news outlets are taking a “wait and see” attitude, while the Journal Register Co. may very well be what they’re waiting to see. After all, in the era of HhJ, waiting always is a bad move.

Journalism is morphing into an environment that allows for seamlessly free-flowing information fast, accurate and unbiased (at least that’s what the most recent study shows). It is, however, this exact environment that old media pollutes by far too many checks, balances, filters and fear of litigation. Not to mention being chained to the printing press.

The ultimate goal of the HhJ era is to find a cheap (maybe free, but fast is more important than free) way of producing news (but not sacrificing content) for the consumer that brings in cash for that producer.

It’s not easy. But what Montgomery Media and News-Herald (the two newspapers who were the crash tests for The Ben Franklin Project) are showing us is that production can be seamless. So much so that it can allow journalists to work anywhere via their handheld devices—cutting costs and allowing news outlets, in particular newspapers, to focus on initiatives such as future advertising models (i.e. tags) and future editorial models (i.e. ideaLab).

The tools used for The Ben Franklin Project included Survey Monkey, UStream, Vimeo and Photoshop.com. All of this software is available for use outside a newsroom and in the field. What news outlets should be doing is investing time and staff (if they can) into developing new media initiatives—a sort of Q’s lab for journalism—where all new technologies are tested and used by journalists immediately to better advance media.

Such thinking, as done by Paton, combined with the courage to take on such a project, proves that innovation is possible within an entrenched industry. Innovation, though, never has happened where industry leaders direct their minions to “wait and see what becomes popular,” or, worse, bring only ideas that make money immediately so that we can keep the dying model alive. Extinction is the reward for failing to adapt.

In six months from now, will Paton’s project still be used at these newspapers? I’m hopeful—and optimistic. Because there is no stopping this new media tsunami. It’s not restructuring the old model. It’s not developing new ways to implement into the old model. Instead, it’s creatively destroying the industry and reinventing the way news is collected, produced and distributed in the era of new media: HhJ. That’s where we should start to focus—not in the past, but in the very near (and sometimes distant) future.

Ultimately, we all want to be counting the Benjamins.

A Pew study released Sunday shows that nearly half of Americans rely on people around them to find out the news. How? The study says 44 percent of online news users get it through e-mail, automatic updates or posts from social networking sites. It cites that Twitter exploded in 2009 with a monthly audience increase of 200 percent.

All of this undoubtedly is due to the increasing handheld world of mobile devices and the ability to instantly tweet, Facebook, and YouTube faster than any “old school” medium.
The most discussed topics, according to the study is politics, foreign events, economy, technology and health and medicine.
This is alarming to local, traditional media outlets whose numbers are slipping quickly and losing readers to local bloggers who use new media initiatives.

It also is important to note that the study states the users who spread news via new media platforms don’t seem to take sides on an issue.

“Each social media platform also seems to have its own personality and function. In the year studied, bloggers gravitated toward stories that elicited emotion, concerned individual or group rights or triggered ideological passion. Often these were stories that people could personalize and then share in the social forum—at times in highly partisan language. And unlike in some other types of media, the partisanship here does not lean strongly to one side or the other,” states the study.

This is vital since it is part of the reason mainstream news outlets are crumbling. People don’t want to hear slanted sides of the issue. They want to hear news and, if they’re interested, they’ll continue to dig (and maybe then find a side).

Granted, according to the study, it states that social media players/bloggers still rely on traditional media (and, it states, only the BBC, CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post), but it’s more important to note that the instantaneousness of the new media wave (i.e. Twitter users) do not rely on those outlets.

This instant communication via Twitter accounts (and a more immediate method that may soon come either from a smart blogger or media socialite) is where people want to get their news first, then they will continue to look into the subject if they are interested.

Traditional media still does not embrace this. They rather would have a reporter leave a scene with a photographer, go back to the newsroom, write something up, edit it, send it to the next editor, put it online, then build it up for the next day’s paper. No good. Give it to me now. A story should first hit a Twitter account, then a blurb on Facebook, next get the photo up from a scene (via a laptop or phone), then get to a newsroom or your home and write something fast, put it up (maybe do a rewrite for the next day’s paper) and call it a good day’s work. Any other differentiation is not the new paradigm.

The conclusion of the study is very weak and is pretty much a “wait and see” attitude. That’s exactly what doesn’t work as media constantly changes. Too many traditional news outlets take this stance and are unwilling (and sometimes because of cash, unable) to make the move to embrace new media. The cash problem is understandable, but the answer to that problem is a direct result of changes with new media (for example, tags might be worth a try).

If news outlets continue to “wait and see,” it’s total annihilation. When? No one really knows. But, looking at the past two years, will traditional outlets be around in 10 years? Twenty years? Chances are unlikely. Ralph Martin, the president of Tribune Total Media, said in a May panel discussion that he wouldn’t let his young son enter this business.

Heck, I’ve always been told, “Out with the old, in with the new.”

Jay Rosen, of New York University, brought up this very same subject in January 2005, during a Blogging, Journalism & Credibility conference.

He said the debate of bloggers vs. journalists “is over.” At that time, however, it was just beginning. Now, it’s flourishing.

Blogs and Internet start-up companies are where people are turning for their news. They are sick of mainstream media rants and want the story told by those who can give them the news fast with some credibility, or at least a non-obfuscated bias in what they report.

The problem with media today is that there simply is one, no interactive voice in the press and, two, no modernization of an old model that’s failing.

As a result of both of these problems, the blogger took birth and is revolutionizing the way news is reported and the way news is delivered.

An April ruling in a New Jersey state appellate court said shield laws (the overbearing rules used by journalists to protect sources) don’t apply to bloggers because they’re not “real” journalists.

This under-covered story poses a threatening future to what is the future of the news. And that’s bloggers.

Look at the ever-popular Huffington Post, which was founded as a blog and is categorized as such. Their staff is bloggers who are journalists. There’s no blurring the lines. Newspaper numbers this past year dropped 8.7 percent. Every major metropolitan paper, except for The Wall Street Journal, on the top 25 FAS-FAX report dropped as much as 21 precent in circulation. Blogs, on the other hand, have grown significantly. The Huffington Post made it into the top 10 news sites in the past month and Drudge Report isn’t too far behind. (More here.)

Mainstream media fails to recognize this. And it kills them. There’s no one running to the television screen anymore to gawk over the attractive reporter stating the news. There’s also no one waiting for their Sunday newspaper because they have to read a certain reporter’s column. “Who gives a sh**, I saw that hours ago,” usually is the response when I ask someone if they’ve seen what so-and-so wrote.

This shows a very serious transition in the news business. People want their news immediately—they don’t care where it’s from. The news feed on Facebook from a friend will do just fine. The mobile app they downloaded that pops up an alert on their phone also works. The blogger who happens to (and, now, usually does) beat CNN or MSNBC or AP is most people’s now-credible source for news.

And, instead of using those people or picking their brains for ideas, media outlets usually say, “They’re just bloggers, what do they know?” (Stories broken by bloggers here.)

Apparently a lot more than professional, er, traditional journalists. After all, they’re the ones at the forefront of the online journalism movement, ultimately honored with the title of journalist.