The death knell grew even louder this week. No, I’m not talking about the impending end of winter and the dwindling snowpack.

I’m talking about more bad news for those of us who report it, with a less than rosy outlook courtesy the Pew Research Institute’s annual “State of the News Media” report.

According to the report, released on Monday, the internet and recession conspired to take an even bigger bite out of the daily newsroom in 2012. Last year, the number of full-time newsroom professionals dropped below 40,000 – its lowest point since 1978 and a drop of 30 percent from the newspaper heyday of 2000.

That somewhat startling statistic was brought closer to home last week when our partner in newsdom down the street, The Durango Herald, laid off 11 employees across Southwest Colorado.

Of course, there’s no good reason why the newspaper industry would be immune to such “corrective measures” as layoffs and downsizing. After all, industries across the board – from automotive and banking to technology and housing – have experienced belt tightening in the wake of the leaner, meaner post-recession America.

It’s just that, for obvious reasons – and not so obvious – print media is something near and dear to my heart, not to mention pocketbook. Not only have I been toiling in the pits of deadline writing, paper delivery, classified ad taking and complaint fielding for the last 20 years – including a six-year-stint at the aforementioned daily – but dare I say, writing is in my blood (along with a good deal of ink.) See, in addition to my friends and former coworkers who are still working in the daily trenches, there is a disproportionate number of inkslingers in the family tree, including a sister, recently laid off from the library of a major daily; an uncle, about to retire from 40-plus years at the sports desk of another city daily; and a cousin who has made us all look like extreme underachievers by breaking into one of the “Big Three” networks in addition to pumping out a few books.

Nevermind that I can’t even seem to find the time to read a book, let alone write one, there’s a certain kinship among those of us who put words to paper on a regular basis in an effort to accurately reflect not just what’s going on in our own mind, but in the world around us. In other words – a journalist.

Yes, I know, journalists rank somewhere above “cockroaches” but below “telemarketers” on the respect-o-meter, but something tells me that as the screws tighten on editorial resources, that may change. And who knows, someday we may even rise to that coveted spot between “meter reader” and “dog catcher.”

That’s because in addition to the downward spiral in reporters, the Pew also reports another interesting, if not unsettling, trend. As the number of journalists has declined, just about anyone and everyone with something they’d like to say in the public arena can now do so, thanks to social media and other digital technology. And while this is all good and fine for dissemination of information, what about the dissemination of misinformation? See, more and more such “free-flowing ideas” are finding their way into traditional media outlets under the guise of “news.”

Case in point: the 2012 presidential election. According to Pew, only about a quarter of statements in the media about the character and records of the presidential candidates originated with journalists in the 2012 race, while about half came from political partisans. That is a reversal from a dozen years ago, when half the statements originated with journalists and only a third came from partisans. The campaigns also found more ways than ever to connect directly with citizens. Again, all good as long as we are able to discern between truth and hogwash, that is, in between pop-up ad assaults.

Unfortunately, this trend extends beyond politics, as more entities seek to fill the void left by the ever-shrinking newsroom. Most notable was a fake press release, that was redistributed by the Associated Press as well as other news organizations, purported to be from Google, which actually came from a public relations distribution site. In other words, nothing more than a paid advertisement.

And as such channels become even more direct, and the source of information even more vague, the filter of the traditional press will play a more important role than ever. A little something called “accountability.”

Sure, it may not come from the smoky confines of a newsroom while harried writers peck away at an old Swingline. Nor should it. After all, we’re not still driving around in Edsels and calling each other on a rotary dial. And, yes, there may even come a day when we’re not going down to the corner newsstand, picking up the daily rag and sticking it under our arm (hopefully not in my lifetime.)  

Thankfully, for now, I know a whole lot of people with a healthy disdain for Facebook who enjoy powering off, sitting down and getting their fingers dirty. They enjoy the tactile experience of turning the page, and yes, they even enjoy leisurely perusing the ads without having them obnoxiously popping into their face every 10 seconds. In fact, I’m still astounded by the number of people who act surprised when I tell them the Telegraph has a website (www.durangotelegraph.com.)

And yes, like most people, I am guilty of the frequent online news drive-by: visiting a few sites, quickly scanning the headlines, maybe scrolling down for a few graphs, and moving on. But I’m also OK with having to pay for this convenience if need be.

See, I’m still a firm believer in the fourth estate (which might come to resemble more of a condo than a palatial spread in coming years) even if it means having to scale a pay wall to get to the truth.

– Missy Votel