Want To Know Why Newspapers Are Going Out Of Business? Because Adding Value Never Seems To Be An Option
from the massive-failure-in-action dept
Lots of folks in the newspaper business say that Howard Owens is a guy who really gets the online news business -- and recognizes the challenges and opportunities. I don't know much about him, but I hear such good things from people who I trust, that I have to admit that I'm perplexed by Owens' recent post where he defends GateHouse Media's lawsuit against the NY Times. As you may recall, GateHouse sued the NY Times for effectively aggregating local stories from GateHouse sites and putting them on its own page. These stories all included links back to the original, and didn't include the entire content, but did include the headline and the lede -- which most people (outside of newspaper people) consider to be perfectly reasonable fair use. The NY Times eventually settled in a way that seemed bad for everyone. Owens worked at GateHouse (and was quiet about the lawsuit at the time). He left soon after, and there was some talk that it may have been because he disagreed with the lawsuit -- but that appears to not be the case.Instead, he has written this lengthy defense of the lawsuit. But rather than vindicate GateHouse, it seems to represent a lot of what's wrong in the online newspaper business these days. When someone who "gets it" like Howard Owens does, and then declares that "I don't know what more we could have done" after describing the various legal threats Gatehouse tossed up against the NY Times, it makes me shake my head.
What more could you have done? You could have competed more effectively. Owens complains about "substitute home pages," where the Boston.com was trying to take away GateHouse's readers. There's a pretty straightforward response to that: if that's all it takes to take away your community, you've failed your community. If the entire value of your site was in providing the headlines and ledes, and someone else copying those headlines and leads causes you to lose the community, you haven't been providing enough value to that community, and you deserve to lose it. Newspapers have neglected their biggest asset, their own communities, for way too long, and this is another example of that. If GateHouse provided a better service where the value went beyond the headline and the lede, there wouldn't be concerns about how such "copying" would take away from GateHouse.
As we've pointed out repeatedly, there are a bunch of sites out there that copy all our content. Not just the headlines and the ledes, but all of the content. Some are pure spam sites. Some are aggregation sites. Some are trying (and failing) to prove the point that we'd get upset if someone copied our stuff. But, that's not what happens -- because this site has much more than just the content. It has the community. It has the Insight Community, where we actually help the community make money. Some of our community members made five figures in 2008. What newspaper has done that for their community? Our community has great ongoing discussions all the time. These other sites can't replicate that. All they can do is end up sending us more traffic.
So, I'm sorry, but the idea that GateHouse Media couldn't do anything else is ridiculous. It's a sign of all that's wrong with online newspapers today. They don't look at all of the amazing things they can do. They just throw up their hands and wonder what they can do, beyond charging people or suing.
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: adding value, howard owens, newspapers
Companies: gatehouse media, ny times
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
When do we finally say enough is enough?
My grandkids believe that I don't need newspaper because they buy me this computer. Still have not been able to print the paper from my lapcomputer. I have been able to find news on teh internet, but not the same as reading a paper.
My grandkids mean well, they just dont understand how it is that we got to this point with music. Records are just as good, if not better than electron music on the ipods. I still have all my my lps from my youth. These cannot be replace no matter when I looke on the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When do we finally say enough is enough?
And I thought I was old.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apparently I'm not very old
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When do we finally say enough is enough?
Every media starts somewhere and moves on to better and bigger things. It's just that the newspapers are decades behind. This is coming from someone who actually works at a newspaper and is hoping of not getting laid off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: When do we finally say enough is enough?
I agree with your point that times change and things upgrade, but at the same time change isn't always a good thing. Change can be good OR bad. It's so up in the air.
Example is Obama saying we needed a change in this nation. I'm totally middle of the road on politics so I'm not for or against either side but my point his change is good for some people but bad for others. It doesn't necessarily mean we have to upgrade or anything. This whole newspaper deterioration is a good thing to the newer generations (not always, but somewhat), but to the folks who hate computers or can't figure out how to use them it's terrible.
What about those people who have a hard time sitting and reading a computer screen because it bothers their eyes. They'd much rather have paper. So what do they do; they print it. What's the change really in that? You're shifting that printing to the audience and that's not really a big difference, so why not keep newspapers around if people are going to print them off anyway. Personally, I HATE reading things online whether it be books, papers or even newspaper articles. It hurts my eyes a lot and honestly, something about curling up on the fouton in my dorm room with a cup of coffee and the morning newspaper is just relaxing.
I'm in the works of studying print news and hope to keep newspapers alive. I love them and I do know others who do as well. It's like ONE or TWO people decided they were the voice of society and were like "Oh hey, we don't think newspapers are needed anymore," like they were speaking for everyone or something.
Again, this is mostly just to make people think, not to completely bosh you or your thoughts. =) You have a very good argument.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When do we finally say enough is enough?
It's very hard to find the breadth of news on any electronic media to compare with, say, the FT or London Times. If you have only used the Web and TV, you don't realize what you're missing.
Of course the Web gives you many other things, as Mike regularly says. And frankly most newspapers are rubbish. But OP has a point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When do we finally say enough is enough?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When do we finally say enough is enough?
I presume (possibly my mistake) you mean what is on at the movie theatre?
How about calling the local theatre on the phone and asking them?
Or maybe the next time you are in the area, walking in and having a look at their session times board? And while you are there, pickup the printed flyer with the session times for the next week on it.
Maybe talk to your neighbour and see if they know/have the flyer.
Perhaps the local community centre has a bulletin board where people post this information?
Most theater's these days have all their session times online. Here in Australia, the major thaetre chains, Hoyts, Greater Union, Dendy, all have online session times. You can even buy the ticket online. I can't imagine it being any different in other industrialised countries.
This is true for many facilites and services, not just cinemas. You can do your grocery shopping online and have it delivered without having to brave the crowds, Woolworths online.
So do you still use ice boxes rather than a refigerator/freezer? Was the change, sacking all those icemen who came around every day to restock the ice, "just another piece of our life falling apart"?
How about modern flushing toilets? Would it have been better to keep with the horse drawn manure carts that came and emptied the thunderboxes every day? Was this another "piece of our life falling apart"?
Same question with horses to trains to trams to cars. Or papyrus reed boats to wooden sailing vessels to paddle-wheel steamers to steel-hulled boats to oceanliners to aeroplanes.
Life changes, civilization changes, values change, technology changes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
listen to the man, kids
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: listen to the man, kids
To your point about Delhi and other cities, in all second and third world nations ink on paper thrives. Not because it's better, but because it's all there is, television, internet and in many cases electricity penetration is still in the single digits.
Electronic media does speak truth to power, just as print does. The medium doesn't matter, the information does. The internet spreads it faster and further. Still not better, just faster. Either the publishing media embraces technology or the companies will be extinguished. Newsprint is/was a good techology for it's time in it's world. The world moved on to new technology.
There are two kinds of fools. One that says "this is old, there for it's good" and one that says "this is new, therefore it's better".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: listen to the man, kids
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: listen to the man, kids
Independent news as you describe it occurring in countries besides the US simply does not exist in the US. It is all the same old grind. The same story all you had to do is fill in the blanks of who, what and where and you have US news.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: listen to the man, kids
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: listen to the man, kids
Of course by people we mean only those with a little badge that says press, and by media we mean only dead trees, and by publisher we mean someone with billions of dollars to spend.
Now it makes perfect sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BILL GATES TO BUY MARS!
By JOHN CARTEROF
Financial Reporter
Redmond, Wash.
BILL GATES, taking advantage of the current economic crisis, has announced an ambitious effort to buy Mars, TechDirt learned today. One would think the founder of Microsoft has no more mountains to climb. That's far from true, and those mountains are not on this planet.
And now a company insider is telling TechDirt that Gates, the man who revolutionized the world of computing with Windows, plans to move from cyberspace to outer space. His target? Not Earth but Mars, the fourth planet from the sun. The reason? "Because it's there," our source laughs. "He thinks it's the next logical step. The age of computers was launched by the machines we created to explore space. To come up with the next generation of computers, Gates believes we need to go back into space.
"He also mentioned he wanted a new vacation home, something with a whole lot of privacy." Mars would certainly give him that. The latest data from the Red Planet shows it to be cold and lifeless.
"It's like Finnadigbodagattir on a Thursday night," laughed Einar Fredrikktsen, who is arranging the sale. He is the Greenland ambassador at the United Nations.
Not that the real estate purchase process came easily. As an uninhabited world, Mars fell under the jurisdiction of the United Nations Institute of Technology (UNIT). When the UN first decided to sell the Red Planet as a fund-raiser for peacekeeping efforts -- ironic since Mars was the Roman god of war -- Helki Santgar also made a bid to buy it. Though the international home-furnishing store mogul had the cash, his computer mysteriously malfunctioned when he was submitting his final bid. He also didn't have a way of actually getting to Mars. Neither did an anonymous third bidder who lives in Springfield, Ohio.
"We are at least fairly assured that Gates would have no difficulty commuting," said UNIT chairman Fredrikktsen. "The people at Microsoft are apparently developing a new version of Windows to make the trip -- something like 'Microsoft Wormhole.' "
Microsoft Wormhole will essentially be a matter-transporter, our source tells TechDirt. There are rumors the traveler would be digitally disassembled by a computer or cell-phone attachment, sent through Windows software and reconstituted at his destination.
"Developers will allegedly debug the program by going through the wormhole themselves," our insider explained. "So far, the worst that's happened is that an engineer somehow acquired another ear."
One feature in particular which our source thinks could be "the next big thing" is the compression utility which provides an instant five-pound weight loss per transport.
"We call it a super-'fast' program since it keeps you from eating," he chuckled. "It's better than exercise. Thanks to the passive nature of the Internet, we have a huge and 'spreading' community of potential users, if you get my drift."
"I hope Wormhole works as well as the Windows Millennium Edition," whined W. Smithers, who represented the bidder from Springfield. "If not, we have hounds that we'll send to pull him out."
The purchase also has political ramifications. Reporters who attended a recent press conference with President Bush asked him if he would ever consider visiting Mr. Gates in his new home. According to them, he said, "You bet. I've always dreamed of vacationing closer to the sun. And -- it's a red state, right?"
"Yes, sir," they replied patiently.
"Sure. It's the moon that's blue," they say the President went on. "Well, the democrats can have the moon," he said, gesturing toward his seat.
People who have bought homes know how exhausting the process can be. We asked our Microsoft source what Bill Gates thinks it would be like to buy an entire world.
"It would be rough, I can tell you that, though not quite as difficult as drawing up his prenup," the source explained. "Plus there's two moons which would have to be bought separately. If you stacked them up, the documents alone would reach his new planet from here.
"It's not simply a matter of buying land," he continued. "As Weekly World News has reported on numerous occasions, alien law is a real growth market. If microbes or amoeba are discovered on Mars their rights have to be preserved without reservations. Or rather, with reservations," he said with a wink, alluding to accommodations made for Native Americans.
Microsoft has also allegedly hired legal experts to draw up proprietary software licenses for the Red Planet. According to our man, "It will work like region codes on DVD players. If Wormhole users pick up any viruses on Mars they won't infect Earth hardware and vice versa."
When asked whether Gates plans to pick up a few more astral bodies when he's firmly entrenched on Mars, our wellinformed source stated, "The sky's the limit. He's got his eye on Pluto. Naturally, I guess he wants to build a dog house there."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BILL GATES TO BUY MARS!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BILL GATES TO BUY MARS!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Newspapers DO Try More Things Than You Say
Duh, Mike. You forgot lobbying for regulation, and pleading on talk shows.
You see, they are more creative than you think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GateHouse Media needs to use its existing advantage
Neither the NYTimes nor internet local sites like Yelp or whatever have remotely the capacity to cover hyperlocal news, because they just don't have the network. Why can't GateHouse link up all these local small properties into a network that consumers can see?
Can you believe at least one GateHouse local paper (the one I'm familiar with) CHARGES $5/MONTH for access to its online site? AND if you are a current subscriber to the print edition, it STILL charges $2 a month!! This is sheer idiocy. Even if you are wedded to a paywall, why would you reduce the value for already paying customers?
Instead, GateHouse could easily put together a network that, for the small towns it covers, would blow sites like http://www.everyblock.com/ out of the water. Those sites can't focus on small towns, because there are too many and they aren't dense enough sources of income. GateHouse already has made that investment into small towns, the least it can do is properly utilize that investment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spin down all missiles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The following sums it all up
Perfectly said!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cognitive dissonance
If you haven't read this before, I recommend it:
http://is.gd/htBI
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cognitive dissonance
Dan, I read it and commented on it in an earlier thread when someone else pointed to it. I'm afraid I don't find it compelling at all. You're basically saying the same thing: that GateHouse seems to think it has a right to its business model, and any *real* competition is somehow unfair.
I don't buy that at all.
GateHouse had plenty of ways to compete. Instead, it chose to sue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cognitive dissonance
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Cognitive dissonance
I tried to make it clear in the post itself: you compete by building value to the community to interact with the content on your site, rather than someone else's. It's the same as every other business model we talk about here.
In the music industry, even though Trent Reznor's last CD was available entirely legally for free online, because he worked hard to connect with his community, they didn't abandon him for those "copies".
The ability to serve your community is important. GateHouse apparently felt that all it offered its community was a lede and a headline. I have no sympathy for them if they chose not to build out other ways to engage that community and keep them on GateHouse sites.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The long and slow decline of newspapers comes from very basic fact that by the time they are in your hands, they are already out of date. Deadlines for the printing process and the physical shipping of that information to each person is an intense and expensive task. When faced with competition from TV news, radio, internet, and other "instant" news services, they are the dodo of the information age.
They were borderline hanging on with declining ad revenues by slowly slicing away their staff, but the recent decline in the world economy has started to push them off the cliff. The truly weak are dying right now, the seriously wounded will be gone in a few weeks.
Information is like bread, it gets stale really fast. The public's appetite for information won't wait for the next morning, not when we can have it now, live, streamed to our iphones.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Value is relative
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Failing because of dishonesty, perhaps?
Example: The NY Times, et al, have spent the last 8 years lambasting and demonizing the Bush administration--and especially the last 6 months or so for the credit and housing disaster that has spelled doom for the financial sector. Heck, Obambi was a shoo-in with everybody and their dog blaming Bush for every problem we have.
However, before Bush was even in office, the NY Times correctly and precisely predicted the ramifications of extending credit to low-income borrowers and the effect it would have on Fannie and the economy as a whole:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&scp= 1&sq=fannie%20mae%20eases%20credit%20to%20aid&st=cse
I bet they just hate it that anyone can search for this article and find that they clearly saw ahead of time, as consertatives have been echoing for many months now, that the Clinton administration, Fannie and especially Franklin Raines, are directly responsible for the problems we're now seeing.
For this reason, I wouldn't take the NY Times if it was free, simply because they're only in the business of expanding the liberal agenda, regardless if it's actually bad for the country. In fact, they want to country to get worse, in order to create even more dependence on the teet of the government sow.
And, like most MSM, they were/are totally in the tank for Obambi, who is about to mortgage the futures of generations to come with his Spendulus legislation.
Hail Xenu!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Failing because of dishonesty, perhaps?
>> is about to mortgage the futures of generations
>> to come with his Spendulus legislation.
Right. Funny you mention mortgages, as that has been the major export of America for the past several years. Exotic investments: Repackaged home mortgages and other securities, bought up by overseas interests. This is what caused the bubble to burst. The US lacks production of anything except fuzzy math, mountains of paperwork, and crappy cars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Failing because of dishonesty, perhaps?
You forgot lawsuits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Failing because of dishonesty, perhaps?
If everyone saw what was coming, why didn't the Bush administration stop it? I think that's the reason people pin this on Bush. He was the President after all, with damn near unlimited ability to push any agenda of his choosing. But as usual, he sat on his hands while the situation worsened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Failing because of dishonesty, perhaps?
The MSM would like us to believe that the only bad things Clinton ever did was dip cigars and his member in the various orifices of an intern (and any other skirt who grabbed his attention). The truth is that the economy under Clinton would have been a total bust if it wasn't for the Internet and technology boom that fueled the 90's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Failing because of dishonesty, perhaps?
No, Pres. Bush and co, had a game plan all along. That was the further their own interest. They wanted the oil reserves that are in Iraq and used 9/11 as a reason to get it. It had nothing to do with protecting us.
And so far as the economy under Clinton... if it would have been a bust, then it wouldn't have changed since he inherited the recession from Bush, Sr. Or did you forget about that too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Howard Owens
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Howard Owens
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Print media vs aggregators
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lack of integrity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If Value is the new King, then Content is ...
Here's to hoping we figure it out and somebody listens to us.
Great post. Thank you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Financial Mess
Unfortunately there were also politicians greased by special interests who made sure those attempts fell on deaf ears. Even John McCain tried to stop this. He made at least one impassioned Senate floor speech warning of this a year or so before the bottom fell out. The Bush people made a number of attempts to plug the loopholes being exploited.
Those trying to correct this regulatory loophole situation, were marginalized quickly w/ the now tired rhetoric, racism.
Barney Frank is on record charging any who wanted to create some sort of regulatory reform, racists. He told his fellow House members those seeking to regulate were just against those less well off having homes. He also told his fellow House members as late as early 2008 that Fannie & Freddie were financially sound, backed by the government. He just failed to mention that meant taxpayers would have to bear the financial burden of fixing the mess.
But Barney was not alone. Chris Dodd in the Senate did his part to thwart those regulatory efforts. Dodd is now better known as the guy who got a sweetheart mortgage deal from now failed Countrywide Financial. Perhaps Senator Dodd was too blinded by his special financial deal to recognize the pitfalls of loans to those who simply could never have afforded to repay them if any little financial issue or interest rate change came up for those customers.
Our politicians failed us by over-regulating & poorly regulating many of these financial organizations & instruments, then actually failing to issue regulations that would have helped, but based their opposition solely on political gains rather than actual financial understanding of the market.
Republicans AND Democrats alike failed us. Too much government in many cases, too little other cases, none when called for, & perhaps worst of all, most poorly written in the first place. This mess is not because capitalism failed but because politicians, government, special interest groups suspiciously significant influences, greed, campaign contribution paybacks, political grandstanding, & a desire to push America into a specific ideological direction some want since "they" know better than any of us how to run this country & even our daily lives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Financial Mess
Our country needs to get back to common sense. No one made a stink about the situation because of greed. Now those same people who were making big bucks are asking for help.
I've seen some ideas that maybe we can get back on track by lowering mortgage rates across the board to say 4%. I think that is a heck of an idea.
It helps homeowners better afford their payments, which helps the lender because they are getting repaid. 90% is way better than 0%.
If the homeowners are better off, then they are spending whatever extra they now have... which helps retail.
Retail now has people buying so they need to order more product, which helps manufacturing.
Manufacturing needs to hire more people to keep up with increased demand. That helps unemployment.
More people working will help with more taxes being paid, which helps repay for all of these damn bailouts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Howard Owens what?
His "great" online only Batavian will never survive, especially when he is the only one running the ship.
I can't help but notice now that he is no longer "employed" it is the first time in a very long time that you are "too busy" to Twitter......
Hmmm hence the dismissal....?
Good Luck with your new venture Howard and let us all know when reality actually kicks in.. I generously give it 6 - 8 months give or take depending on how big your bank account is..
Wake up people this guy is a joke, just amazed he has suckered people this long.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE: Soothing the Unbalanced
/*
Protecting us by illegally invading a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks? While at the same time declaring that he really doesn't think about OBL?
*/
I am not quite sure what the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan had to do with the sub prime mortgage crisis, but you appear to be on a demented roll, so go with it!
/*
No, Pres. Bush and co, had a game plan all along. That was the further their own interest. They wanted the oil reserves that are in Iraq and used 9/11 as a reason to get it. It had nothing to do with protecting us.
*/
Again, not sure what this has to do with the discussion at all, but you're still on a roll, so go with it!
/*
And so far as the economy under Clinton... if it would have been a bust, then it wouldn't have changed since he inherited the recession from Bush, Sr. Or did you forget about that too?
*/
Uh, this appears to be where you go completely off the tracks. So, you know, stop going with it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kindle Saves the Day
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i dont really care
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or are they? Another article I read about news is that the internet has allowed us to choose the news we read. And before then, so did cable television. And before them, news magazines offered this choice. Time magazine, Newsweek, Business Week and The Economist are obvious examples. Even if you restrict news to newsprint, you still have the Wall Street Journal and (ugh) the tabloids. Plenty of newspapers, if you ask me.
As for *local* news? We'll only have local news so long as someone's willing to pay for it. We have both a *town* newspaper that's free, and local news on television. I'm not going to miss my local newspaper. At all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Newspapers Going Out of Business Because Ads Don't Work
The reason newpapers are going out of business is because the advertising they rely on for most of their revenue doesn't work anymore. Reason? Everybody (brands) say the same thing. Everybody says their running a sale or buy 1 get the second one free, etc. This example is for simplicity sake. This is no kind of way to get you to remember to go out and buy the product! For example, when was the last time you heard somebody say they were going out to buy some Mr. Clean?
The reason you don't read about this perspective or see it on TV is because the publishers and broadcasters don't want to criticize their clients. (the hand that feeds them)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For "Reality Check"
The Batavian is still going, bigger and better than ever and dominating its market.
What are you doing with your pathetic life?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]