PRINT JOURNALISM IS not dead and never will be. Coming to this conclusion came through knowing how to start conversations.

“What’s your major?� They respond. It’s already a conversation. I love college.

“One of those,� I say snidely. They either laugh or are offended. I can work with either.

The follow-up questions either veer into simple curiosity —Ã¢€œWhat are you going to do with that?â€? — or plain rudeness — “majoring in liberal arts is like majoring in general ed.â€?

They either laugh or are offended. I can work with either. If they still laugh, it̢۪s a simple matter of continuing the harassment. If they̢۪re offended, it̢۪s a little trickier.

The angry ones insult my pedigree and my omniscience.

“What’s your major?� I’m mass communication and journalism, with an emphasis in print journalism.

“One of those,� they sneer. “What are you going to do with that? The newspaper is dead, or dying.�

I guess I had it coming. When they̢۪re broadcast journalism majors, they̢۪re even worse.

“Readership is down, and ratings are up. More people watch television than read the paper. Your major is really in worse shape.�

I don̢۪t retort. The truth would only hurt them.

Broadcast journalism — or, as I like to call it, pandering to the lowest common denominator — is by and large sensationalist yellow journalism.

Fox News is little better than watching the pretty people read aloud a partisan tabloid. If it̢۪s fatal and bloody, or cute and fuzzy, or round and bouncy, it̢۪s a news package.

But even CNN, historically credible pioneer of the 24-hour news format, broadcasts a large amount of titillating, ratings-friendly filler.

Even then, youth of today don’t rely on broadcast journalism for their current events needs. According to any survey I’ve ever heard of, kids these days rely on the Daily Show — naturally, I read about this in newspapers.

But newspapers can̢۪t take the moral high ground. Newspaper companies pioneered and perfected the very exaggeration techniques our developmentally-challenged television journalists adopted.

Cesspool or misinformation or not, television news’ insipid nature doesn’t contest the main point — newspapers are dead, so print journalism is useless.

But with each new advance of media, cynics declare that newspapers are doomed.

When the radio became popular, newspapers were dead, but newspapers survived because they had pictures. Now, most radio stations are music-only.

Tell me, who won this first bout?

With the first television news broadcast, newspapers were dead, but survived because they had immediacy. When television news went live, newspapers survived because they had a greater variety and number of stories.

With the first online-exclusive news content, newspapers were dead. This time, the physical newspaper might even go that way.

Online news media faces one disadvantage — staring at a computer screen for too long. Then again, only ornery curmudgeons old enough to know rheumatism and remember the great influenza pandemic unknowingly make that mistake anymore.

In an increasingly Web-centric culture, I doubt that eye soreness is going to undermine the Internet’s huge advantage in short-term news distribution — untold immediacy, and a nigh-infinite amount of information storage.

Barring a Bradbury-esque horror of a future where we̢۪d probably have more serious problems than a transmedia pissing contest, written words cleverly juxtaposed will determine the success or failure of future news media.

Online, print journalism thrives. Well-trained journalists, with an eye for mass communication and a mind for good writing, thrive better.

The newspaper will never die. It will only ascend.