When was the last time you held a newspaper in your hands? I mean, held it to…read? I’m not talking about using a paper to blot us some spill in your garage, or to train the puppy, or to keep that spray paint from getting all over the place.
I’m guessing you haven’t really read a newspaper in the past two or three months. If so, you’re not alone. By most – if not all – measures – the U.S. newspaper business is dying. Except for a few major players, newspapers are bleeding money and ink all over.
The contrarian in this doomsday scenario is, most notably, The Wall Street Journal – which, by the way, has the very best newspaper app for Apple’s iPad (I wonder if the WSJ owner, media savvy Robert Murdoch, has any Apple stock?). I’ll predict here that the WSJ will succeed, long-term, as an entity. They’ve leveraged their content all over the place, and even have the audacity to (gasp) charge customers to read their columnists and features.
Most of the print industry, though, will probably go under or just fade away slowly to irrelevance…IF it doesn’t take its cues from Mr. Murdoch and go digital.
Sample data points from a recent study the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development show the dire circumstances of the American newspaper business, especially when compared to other countries:
Fewer than half of all adults in the United States regularly read newspapers in 2008, compared with 96 percent in Iceland.
Advertising contributed 87 percent of newspapers’ revenues in the United States, compared with 53 percent in Germany, 50 percent in Britain and 35 percent in Japan.
In light of such stats, I wondered how much longer the industry can survive here in the U.S.
Some industry veterans are decidely pessimistic about the viability of newspapers. Here’s a site for laid off journalists to offer their “parting words” of wisdom about the biz. There’s even a website where you can donate to…
advance the search for a support system for the kind of serious public interest reporting that our democracy requires, and that is now so threatened.
Wow.
These thoughts were prompted by some news reports, and also by my need to renew my subscription to…The Wall Street Journal. Yeah, the print edition. I am one of the few people I know of who still read a newspaper – an actual PAPER – every day. Started this daily routine when I was about ten years-old. Not quite ready to stop reading a paper.
I’ve appreciated the stimulating thoughts from Chris Anderson, but have to admit, this review of his newest book is…stimulating in and of itself! What price for your (insert your commodity, service or resource here)? In the end, it seems, even “Free Free Free!” gurus suggest that “Paid Paid Paid” has its merits.
In this Wall Street Journal article (subscription required to read full article) it was noted that most households access 16 television channels, despite the cable industry average offering of more than 100 channels.The reporter suggests that the cable companies need to reduce the number of channels offered, something along the lines of “less is more.”
The reader comments were telling (and you can see all of them without subscribing) and humorous. Several suggested that the number of channels offered isn’t the problem, rather, it is the quality of those channels — and the high price to access them.
I’ve never paid for cable, and don’t watch TV. But what about you? Leave a comment and tell me:
How many channels do YOU need?
And in these days of economic uncertainty, have you considered eliminating “pay TV?”
If so, in favor of what — free (broadcast) TV, web TV, no TV?
“small sites serving the refined interests of niche audiences”
Why is “long tail” important? Because most of us won’t have a mega-site with millions of visitors daily. We still have traffic at our sites, though, and we do touch an audience.
Here’s a video explaining this crucial marketing concept for everyone who has a business and/or is interested in using the web to drive a brand or business.
How to measure the effectiveness of social media? In a word, customers who “spray.” So says Gary Vaynerchuk of Wine Library TV. He’s a bit passionate about the matter.
As I write this there is news of a plane crash in Buffalo, NY. At this moment, however, after a rather extensive online search, the only place I can really find any coverage at all is at Twitter. The microblogging site seems to have a multitude of on-site reporters…a group of non-paid citizens who are giving first-hand accounts and (literally) up-to-the-minute details about the situation as it is unfolding. They are offering information as they can, and also expressing heart-felt concern and sorrow for the victims and their families.
There is a lone newspaper offering an online photo and coverage, The Buffalo News.
Google News had nary a word about the crash, even though it happened some 45 minutes ago.
The New York Times has one small front-page line indicating a plane crash occurred. However, they want to tell you more ONLY if you are a paying subscriber. Absurd! Breaking news coverage – but only if you shell out a fee. This kind of approach to news will only hasten the demise of newspapers – and really, of any outlet that tries to tightly control the flow of information.
I understand the economic realities of traditional media – I’m in radio – so I know the infrastructure needed to support information gatherers and the distribution systems required. Still, it is becoming clear that newspapers cannot employ enough people to support our insatiable need for breaking news. I don’t expect the New York Times to have field reporters in every community across the land. That said, it is obvious that there are folks who are willing and able to cover stories like this and to get the word out – and they do it without pay. This represents a mega-shift in the media world and necessarily has dire implications for those in the traditional news-gathering business.
What I am seeing tonight is the power of Twitter. Citizen journalism, community and a network of connections. Thousands of people communicating instantaneously and without the hindrances of the old way of news coverage.
It seems to me, more and more, that this is the future of news.
Leaving two “traditional” media advertising sales efforts, Google is now planning to shuft their attention to…(surprise!) online streaming. Article here.
Makes some sense, in light of what Google does. Still, I think there is a lot to be made in traditional radio advertising. The medium has some 90% of the U.S. tuned in weekly. Where there are ears, there will be ads!
No matter if you are a budding blogger, or a seasoned blogger, here are some great tips for reviewing and optimizing your online work. Good thing to do as we enter 2009!
