Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

When the Cameras Stop Rolling: What We Lose When TV News Fades

  • Tom Felle

Research output: Chapter in Book or Conference Publication/Proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

Abstract

This Afterword explores the collapse of traditional broadcast journalism and its wider implications for democracy, public knowledge and civic life. It argues that the decline of television news is not merely a technological shift, but a structural transformation that fragments the public sphere, weakens editorial authority and erodes the shared civic moments that once anchored democratic societies. In an era shaped by platform dominance, algorithmic curation and the commodification of attention, journalism's public function faces existential threats. The analysis highlights how the platformisation of news, the growth of ambient information flows and the rise of generative artificial intelligence are reshaping journalistic authority and trust. It also assesses emerging governance models, including new regulatory responses at the EU level and institutional innovations in smaller democracies, such as Ireland. The argument emphasises that the future of journalism cannot be secured by technological adaptation alone. It demands structural innovation in governance, funding and civic infrastructure. If journalism is to retain its democratic purpose, it must be defended as a public good: verified, accountable, inclusive and resilient. The challenge is not to preserve outdated legacy formats but to develop new models that continue journalism's civic mission in a platform-driven world.
Original languageEnglish (Ireland)
Title of host publicationInsights on Broadcast Journalism
EditorsRichard Keeble, John Mair
Place of PublicationLondon
PublisherRoutledge.
Number of pages12
Edition1st
ISBN (Electronic)9781003598077
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2025

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When the Cameras Stop Rolling: What We Lose When TV News Fades'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this