Seattle P-I's Online Traffic Drops... But Just A Bit
from the not-too-shabby dept
A former Seattle Post-Intelligencer reporter, now writing for Paid Content, seems to take some glee in reporting that traffic to the Seattle P-I's website is off 20% since the decision to lay off most of the staff and go web only. But, actually, it seems like a pretty good result. Editorial staff was cut by 80% down to just 20 people. Support staff is basically gone entirely. And then all the printing and delivery expenses are gone as well. To basically cut all that expense and still retain 80% of the traffic? That seems phenomenal. If anything, it validates the decision.
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: journalism, newspapers, online only, traffic
Companies: seattle post-intelligencer
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Nope
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Somethings got to give
and it also makes sense. the advent of web presence and circulation being on a downward spiral.
It appears to be a win win good for the environment less overhead -- face it if they continue the progression writers will work from home and you could outsource your IT tasks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good on them if they can keep it up, and keep enough ad dollars flowing to keep the remaining staff employed.
@RD: The site isn't free - it's ad supported. Get a life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right.....
Right....and then in a few months, you'll say "yeah but, lets see it next year" and then "yeah but, try to sustain that over years" and then "yeah but lets see anyone else do it" and then "yeah but..." forever. If the people who start and run business thought like you and constantly threw up "yeah but" to EVERY SINGLE suggestion of how to do things, there wouldnt be any businesses. So, you are right, in a sense, it DOES matter but you are again DEAD WRONG in thinking it ONLY applies to new business models like this. It applies to ANY BUSINESS ANYONE ENTERS INTO ALL THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE BUSINESS. You dont just set the stuff at the start and go 100 years without ANY adjustments. Businesses CONSTANTLY have to change and adapt or they go out of business. You seem to think if something isnt 100% proven from the get-go AND will remain that way FOREVER, its not viable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Right.....
Seattle PI right now as a website exists and is well known because for many, many years there was a newspaper, and all that goes with it - if you want to look at it that way, they have brand. But that brand lost it's key piece of public space visiblity, the printed newspaper. They have a good website, it has plenty of traffic (they rank well), and they have lost 20% of their traffic in the first month since the buggy whip business was closed.
Clearly, it's too early to tell the effects.
To basically cut all that expense and still retain 80% of the traffic? That seems phenomenal. If anything, it validates the decision.
That is Mike's quote - and he seems to be declaring a winner at this point. I don't agree yet, because we haven't seen all sides - yes, they drop 160 staff and all the expense of pulishing and distributing, but they also tossed away all those ad pages, all that income, etc. So the questions still are out there: Will the people come to the website in the long run without the paper to push it (so far down 20%... so the jury is out), did they cut the staff enough to make the website a profitable business, while still maintaining enough to actually make the website viable and attractive enough to the users?
It's nothing to get angry about. It is just business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Right.....
Based upon my having used both for some time now (over a year), I am more convinced than ever that a print edition, its costs notwithstanding, is far superior when it comes to news reporting than the online edition (even with its forums, blogs, etc.).
If my experience reflects the "digital future", I will gladly opt for buggy whips, which do not require electricity/battery power and which I can easily spread out on my dining room table and peruse while I have my morning cup of coffee. Moreover, it is a bit hard to "clip coupons" from a display without a printer readily at hand.
Maybe the "old business model" is consigned by some to the trash heap of business in the digital age, but I am not one of the "some".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Right.....
If anyone on this site is angry, it's you.
It's just business, you say? Then how in the hell can you sit there and criticize every last thing posted on Techdirt regarding new ideas, changes in the industry, and worse, support models showing to be dying based on consumer change.
"I'm not taking anything as fact until time passes." You sound like every damn executive who is in charge of a "can't let them fail" business only to find out, after time passes, what an incredible stupid decision you just made for doing nothing but ignoring the change.
I've mentioned many times you are ignorant, and this quote of yours defends this.
Harold, you're not a business. You're not in a business. You can say all you want to the contrary, but there's no way you can be. You're too stagnant, ignorant, and arrogant to believe in change, especially if revenue changes.
I believe you mentioned you work for yourself. Let's hope so, because anyone employed in your "business" wouldn't be an employee long.
You should be the one who takes a break. All that negativity is going to pop a blood vessel. There's a big difference between ranting and being negative.
Learn it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Right.....
You can get all theoretical if you want, I have made my living solely on working on the net for 15 years now. I change all the time. But there is a difference, I move from revenue stream to revenue steam, not from revenue steam to "nice theoretical idea". Real businesses don't just jump off a cliff to see what is at the bottom unless they are pushed (and Seattle PI was pushed).
One day when you are no longer studying and actually have to do something in life, then you can comment on other people. Until then, good luck with your studying, I hope you pass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Right.....
This is why we think you're an idiot. You keep shrugging people off, saying that they can't possibly know anything unless they have had the same exact experiences as you have. If you open your eyes and look around you will see that people who know a hell of a lot more than you get these "nice theoretical ideas" working all the time.
But, no, it's impossible that anyone else knows more than you. If someone states a different opinion they must still be in college, high school, never created anything, never done anything. The world must be full of lazy uncreative school students since vary few people do agree with you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Right.....
Also, in response to one of your earlier comments, even if it is ad-supported it is effectively free to the consumers. Everyone knows that "there is no such thing as a free lunch"--I find your attempt at deflection quite disingenuous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right.....
"You can get all theoretical if you want, I have made my living solely on working on the net for 15 years now. I change all the time. But there is a difference, I move from revenue stream to revenue steam, not from revenue steam to "nice theoretical idea". Real businesses don't just jump off a cliff to see what is at the bottom unless they are pushed (and Seattle PI was pushed)."
Yes and being pushed IS WHAT IS HAPPENING. YOU just are in denial about it. The consumer WILL take their business elsewhere and there WILL be change. This whole "jump off a cliff" is bogus because if they DONT look at new ideas, they are toast when this change happens. YOU are in denial that it ever will happen, or that they have ANY NEED to explore ANY of these new ways of doing things. THAT is why people are "angry" (or whatever) at you. EVERYONE in the world understands this except YOU and your industry pals. Well, thats just too bad, you and them will be ground under like the buggy whip makers. You wont be missed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seattle P-I
How do you get that?
Without knowing the impact on revenue (which is likely mostly from ads, and normally VERY sensitive to traffic) there is no way of knowing if it is good, bad, or undecided.
Revenue could be off (at least, eventually) by 90 percent. Would an 80 percent reduction in cost look good then?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]