This prediction has to be a bit vague as I don't know any precise timing. The Cross Media show started last year and there is another planned for the autumn. Next year at IPEX there has to be some coherent presentation of how print fits with communication. I have tried out learning theory of "scaffolding" as a guide to how this could happen. Maybe the scaffolding will be fairly stable around the time of the Cross Media show. On the other hand IPEX could still be something of a panic. We just don't know.
The Guardian as an online transition is still a bit variable, as I come across it. The Guardian Witness continues but I can't find it in the print version yet. I bought an Observer in case there were some photos ( tall buildings last week) but I don't thin k there are any. I find the site is so visual I can't follow a story as it might develop. The Everything Everywhere sponsored tech is the one I check out. More later on how video seems to work in Exeter.
The print adverts seem to have stopped. Now there is "keep on internetting" sponsored by 3. So there is energy coming from phone companies. Is it their idea to make it fairly trivial and get lots of instant hits? The Guardian editorial integration may get lost in this or maybe they just want to keep an income for the print model as long as it lasts.
The Observer has Peter Preston on media, much the same as months back when I last bought one. He worries that London people who comment may be out of touch with the provinces because there is less published in regional newspapers. Might he try a search engine and a wider range of sources? In Exeter I would guess that quite a lot of news and comment is outside the newspaper site.
What is interesting though are the comments that are not developed into stories with facts and investigation. It is claimed that "the web-based march of British journalism across the world can leave home bases scantily covered, as though those who live there don't matter overmuch. " Is this about the Daily Mail? The Guardian? Has he got information on where the Guardian is putting resources? My impression is that the Media and Education pages are very light recently. ( I would welcome something on Futurelear based on a visit to the universities contributing for example) but what is the priority for a global audience online? (Do they get opinion on the dangers of the mooc or a completely different take? Hard to grasp I realise but Peter Preston may have an insight from the marketing meetings)
Then we get
Call it the 20% solution. Two weeks ago, Sir Martin Sorrell, boss of the WPP string of agencies, said that newspaper and magazine ads attracted 20% of advertising revenue but only 7 to 10% of reading time. Something had to change. Last week the internal workings of WPP decreed that Sir Martin's £17.6m salary-plus-bonus package in 2012 was too rich to stomach all over again – so his bonus is henceforth reduced by 20%. Call that the revenge of Fleet Street.
Gosh. How exactly can Fleet Street arrange this sort of thing? If there is a case for less advertising in print, why not examine it as such? Today as it happens there is Guardian take on WPP but I could not find much on how the switch away from print could work out in detail.
However I did find a comment on the middle pages about the "myth of web toxicity" from Laurie Penny.
People once believed that moveable type was evil because books distracted women from their work and allowed ordinary layfolk to read what was actually written in the Bible. Communications technology, though, can't "corrupt your soul" any more than abandoning it can save your soul – and the internet is no different.
There probably will be more panic style writing in the printed version of the Guardian but there may also be some balance. The forms of citizen journalism will continue. I am not sure the Guardian approach will stay the same or get continued support. But some sort of network will be clear in the next year or so. Time will tell what time it is.