The libraries journalists lost when newspapers digitised

This is a story I wrote in 2010 about search engines replacing real people, but today it applies to artificial intelligence.

When I started as a journalist in the late 1970s, newspapers and magazines were still put together using hot metal type. In theory union demarcation meant journalists never got close to the compositor machines in the bowels of the newspaper building, but there were a few times when I did.

At times I catch a faint metallic smell that reminds me of those days.

I also remember the clack of typewriters, telephones with bells, the noisy newsroom clash of egos, the mumbling from the subs desk and the late night questions from the proof-readers. I’ve never been a smoker, but years spent working in newsrooms probably did as much damage to my lungs. Almost every desk had an sh-tray.

And all the pub lunches I ate while waiting for contacts to spill the beans and deliver an exclusive punished my liver.

Those were the days

Of course I miss the shabby, rumpled glamour of the old days. Journalism was fun then. It can still be fun. Although it's now a different kind of fun.

Seeing your story on the home page of a newspaper web site is nothing compared to walking through town where all the newsstands show your latest story. There is thrill when you pass people in cafes or on the bus reading the news you wrote the day before.

Another romance I feel newspapers lost when moving to modern digital systems were their extensive clipping and photo libraries. They employed knowledgable librarians and the other custodians of arcane information who just knew how to find relevant material fast.

The story behind the story

Often, while you were in the newspaper library checking up on old stories, the librarian was often able to chime in with a valuable snippet of extra background information. You might have the clippings, but they'd have the memory of what happened at the time—the story behind the story.

Google did for them.

Sometimes Google can do a fine job of finding old information, but even at its best, it is not as comprehensive. Most of all, I miss chatting with an intelligent human being then seeing a Manilla folder of clips and photos arrive on my desk an hour or so later along with a memo reminding me to go and chat with someone involved with the original story.

Computers will never really replace that.