In the 300-year history of American newspapers, 2008 proved to be the most trying and difficult for the once vaunted institution. It's all but a certainty that 2009 won't be a cakewalk, either.

Gloom and doom is spreading in all quarters as newspaper journalists lament the state of affairs. Kathleen Parker, writing in the Washington Post, sees the handwriting on the wall. Yet, she's not thrilled with what seems to be schadenfreude:

But most painful -- perhaps odd is a better word -- has been the celebration in some quarters.

Yes, we know: Journalists are held in low esteem, below lawyers and politicians. Some deserve it; most do not. In other oddities, we seem to reserve special hatred for the best papers -- the ones that do the expensive, labor-intensive reporting that keeps government in check and exposes corruption, sometimes even among their own kind.

Are papers sometimes wrong? Do some reporters embarrass the rest? Is bias a problem? Yes, yes and yes, of course. Journalists are not saints, but they do perform a valuable service for which the rewards are few. If you want friends or money, my first editor told me, get another line of work.

What, meanwhile, would twitterers and bloggers tweet and blog about if news organizations no longer provided them the meat on which most chew?

To be sure, this is not one of the places that delights in the unraveling of the newspaper business. Seeing dozens of friends lose their jobs over the last 12 months does not make my heart sing. There is no joy in watching an ol' buddy die a slow death.

But over the last couple of weeks, I've become more optimistic. Journalists should be by nature inquisitive and resilient. And many of them have stopped the wailing and started thinking ... ahead.

Writing on his blog (yes, many former newspapermen have now flooded the ranks of the pajamahadeen), Jason Kintzler offered up some ideas to help newspapers reinvent themselves. He's but one of the many, but his sentiments are right on:

So, to all of you doom-and-gloomers satisfied with watching the downward spiral continue, I suggest you start looking for a new profession. For those journalists embracing this change, my hat's off to you. The future of news may not be entirely made of paper, but good content and reliable, ethical journalism will still have its place in the world.

The newspapers of tomorrow won't be published by the newspapers of today unless they embrace and engage a new model of survival. Are you contributing to the change, or settling in for slow demise?

This is what newspapers need - a new attitude, not the tired ol' diatribes bemoaning everything from the Internet to bloggers and twitterers. Yes, change is hard and adapting to a new way of life is difficult for any professional. But the only way to save the industry from the apocalypse, as James Poinewozik of Time put it eloquently, is to embrace change:

The media business needs to see that the shovel it got whacked with--the change in the way people communicate and the spreading of that power--is not necessarily a weapon or a means to make our graves. It's just a tool. Time to start digging.