Should traditional media cover news?

In the journalism world, there's a big hooha buzzing over how Parade magazine's cover story this past Sunday (Jan. 6, 2008).

The headline read, "Is Benazir Bhutto America's best hope against al-Qaeda"--pretty strange, considering she was killed on Dec. 27, 2007.

The outdated headline was due to the fact that Parade had sent its issue to print on Dec. 21, 2007. It would have been too costly to recall the issue, or amend the cover story.

This incident prompted several media watchers like Steve Outing to call Parade, "your grandfather's news magazine".

This flap has brought into question whether magazines like Parade, with its two-week gap between printing and distribution, should even be in the business of covering news. It might make more sense for it to do topical feature stories.

When I think of it, whenever something big happens locally--a massive demonstration in Kuala Lumpur, for example-- I would straight away visit independent online media or blogs for the latest updates.

The Web sites of traditional print media can't keep up to speed with the indie guys and the bloggers. Why?

I guess it has to do with the culture. Traditional media is still mired in the print frame of mind.