Newspapers Are Souvenirs

from the not-the-most-valuable-of-markets dept

Tue, Nov 11th 2008 4:27pm — Mike Masnick

Following last week's historic election of Barack Obama, there was a rush to buy up paper newspapers announcing the news, with the idea being that those newspapers would be quite valuable. In fact, some newspapers were quickly being resold on eBay for up to $400 -- and many buyers plan to preserve the papers, hoping they'll be worth even more in the future. Of course, it sounds as though many newspaper publishers got exactly the wrong lesson from this. Some publishers celebrated the rush to buy newspapers as evidence that newspapers were still relevant and that in "big events" people still turned to print papers. Except, that's not true. Publishers who believe that are deluding themselves. People got the actual news from the internet and TV. The newspapers just represent a souvenir of the event -- not the place to turn to for news about it. Newspapers are never going to figure out how to survive if they take the wrong lessons out of this. People bought newspapers because they could be saved (and resold) -- not because they were suddenly relevant.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: barack obama, newspapers, souvenirs

20 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

some old guy, 11 Nov 2008 @ 5:02pm

I doubt they believed it
They were just trying to assure their investors of their relevance.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul, 11 Nov 2008 @ 5:06pm

True story
So, Mike, what you're trying to say is that, Obama causes destruction of forests?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GeneralEmergency (profile), 11 Nov 2008 @ 5:23pm

Re: True story
No...Silly human sentimentality and a little greed here and there ate those trees.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2008 @ 5:39pm

Will the thousands of newspapers be worth anything in a few decades ? What about a century ?

I think libraries keep copies ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2008 @ 6:25pm

I guess I don't count, reading the news in print every day...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
LMR, 11 Nov 2008 @ 6:44pm

I read the newspaper every day (OMG, I actually have a subscription!) as well as online news sources. I can't imagine restricting myself to just one resource when it comes to staying current and yes, I saved my paper the day after the election. For myself, my children and my grandchildren....not to resell on ebay.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
crystalattice (profile), 11 Nov 2008 @ 8:29pm

How can a paper be worth that much?
Maybe I can see it many years from now but how can a paper be worth $400 right now?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pat, 11 Nov 2008 @ 9:22pm

To be fair, I'd rather be cutting down trees (if we're not complete dipshits, they'll grow back) than raping the ground of precious metals and silicon. Those don't grow back.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twinrova, 12 Nov 2008 @ 3:46am

Yet, on the flip side of this story...
... some newspaper companies are now cashing in on the souvenir craze by offering perfect prints directly from their presses.

So it should be no shock these "perfect prints" retail for over 1000% of the normal price.

Tell me again how this isn't defined as greed. I would easily see a $9.99 price tag as deemed "demand in supply", but $29.99 for a damn newspaper?

Here's hoping the Dow crashes and burns.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bruce P. Van Cleve, 12 Nov 2008 @ 4:31am

historic my butt!
The only thing historic about B.O. is that we elected our fist openly socialist candidate who has vowed to punish small business and other achievers. After a few years and countless bumbling, the public's sour mood will swing back the other way and realize that small businesses like this create jobs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dave, 12 Nov 2008 @ 5:27am

Re: Newspapers: future value and libraries
I still have my "Nixon Resigns" Chicago Tribune. Despite my efforts, it is in bad shape. Newsprint does not hold up well; it is intended as a temporary medium, I think, and so is high-acid paper. It yellows rapidly and becomes brittle. It may be for this reason that libraries in my area do not keep the papers more than a few weeks; they get microfiche or microfilm. I would guess that that is prdeominantly the case.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Crosbie Fitch (profile), 12 Nov 2008 @ 5:29am

Trackback
Material Copies Are Sometimes Valuable
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean, 12 Nov 2008 @ 6:53am

You are part right
You are right when you say, "after a few years and countless bumbling, the public's sour mood will swing back the other way."

Yea, after 8 years of this joke, the public headed the other way. He isn't a socialist you fool, that's just a word the McCain campaign planted for idiots to adhere to.

McCain's acceptance speech was fantastic, but I felt bad for the poor man - his voters/followers were just screaming, yelling and booing everything about the other party and you could see in his face how disappointed he was in them - as he should be - total idiots.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2008 @ 8:12am

I work for Circulation in a small mid-west newspaper. Today we are actually running a promo, get a free Obama Poster with the 5th of Nov. edition of the newspaper for .50 cents. As of now, I've sold 160 dollars worth of papers. I'm sure by then end of the day I'll sell over 400 dollars worth. Got to love historic events, nothing drives up circulation better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2008 @ 8:37am

Re: historic my butt!
If you're so good at seeing the future, why didn't you see that McCain wasn't going to win?

And really, unless you plan to repeatedly prove that you're a simple-minded dolt, swayed by the flimsiest of propaganda, you should really get over the "socialist" BS. If it were socialism, the country would take your puny business and give it to your employees, and then pay you and them exactly the same amount.

Obviously, you have a computer -- go look up socialism. Learn something. It doesn't hurt.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Balthazar, 12 Nov 2008 @ 8:39am

Re: historic my butt!
The only thing historic about B.O. is that we elected our fist openly socialist candidate who has vowed to punish small business and other achievers.

He has done nothing of the sort. What fantasy world do you live in?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Killercool (profile), 12 Nov 2008 @ 9:07am

A (hilariously) relevant anecdote
I saw on the (local) news that one local newspaper correctly predicted and actively resisted just this trend. The owner of this small town's paper intentionally didn't print the winner of the presidential race. From what I remember of the report, there was a group of protesters outside of his building, demonstrating because they "wanted to be able to have a keepsake." He (hilariously) responded that he runs a NEWSpaper, not a scrapbook company. He also mentioned what may be the saving grace of his paper: for big events (like the presidential election) people go to sources that are capable of a faster response, i.e. the internet and TV. His paper focuses on local news, which directly impacts his market, and probably isn't otherwise reported on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael J, 12 Nov 2008 @ 12:23pm

Political News ain't everything
The thing is that "souvenirs" and "mementos" are important in people's lives. While some believe that "political" news, which is usually just about the horse race, is the "important" stuff, there are millions of people who might disagree. About 40% didn't think it was worth voting.

Physical newspapers are a much better tool for thinking and learning than the web. The screen after all is much more like reading a hyperlinked 12"scroll. Nice for consuming data and "information" quickly. A little like fast food.

Print is to information what slow food is to a good meal.

Consider the explosive growth of self published books and the success of photo sites, customized gifts with photos. Not very exciting, to the big wigs, but very important to the people who create them.

Sound bites and quick hits - great for the web. Mulling and getting context? Print and a pencil.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
another mike, 12 Nov 2008 @ 3:33pm

dewey defeats truman
I actually kept campus papers from major events as souvenirs. When the football team steamrolled our arch-nemesis for 57-3 and set the record for 56 000 spectators in the stadium, when the basketball team went to the finals (every issue from the 64 through to the NCAA championship), the special evening edition on Sept. 11, 2001, the tornado that tore up campus, the day a dusty mechanical room blew up and shot a worker clear out into the street (ah, good times).

As a counterpoint to keeping it in print, here's an anecdote in favor of putting it online. One of the local papers here uploaded their entire archive, dating back to their first day pouring ink as the little mining camp printing press over 100 years ago. One of my coworkers, doing a vanity googling, found out that the great-great-granduncle the family never mentions was a convicted hog thief.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 12 Nov 2008 @ 4:44pm

Re: True story
Paul wrote:

...Obama causes destruction of forests?

Not forests—tree farms. Paper is made from pulping softwood trees that are specifically grown to be cut down. No forests are harmed at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]