Why Newspapers Are Failing (Hint: Failure To Get Users To Pay Is NOT The Reason)
from the some-good-analysis dept
A bunch of folks have been submitting two separate stories about why the newspaper business is failing. Much of the stories cover ground that we've covered before, but they do so in such a nice, well-argued package, that I wanted to mention them here. The first, by Bill Wyman, gives five reasons why newspapers are failing. The list is good, but the detailed explanation is better. The first one explains that consumers have never paid for the actual news. It's a point we've made before, but Wyman digs in and explains why that's true, and makes a key point as to why newspapers were able to make money in the past:They held an informal monopoly on a societal convention whereby they deposited those ads--around which they wrapped some reporting, some of it serious, some of it fluff--on subscribers' driveways.The second piece also tackles this same issue, and is by Chris O'Brien, detailing how consumers have never paid for news, but then follows up by pointing out what business newspapers have really been in:
At their peak, local newspapers did two things: They created community. And they provided the local marketplace for goods and services. These services were so profitable, that they subsidized the civic good of journalism. The reason newspapers are in trouble today is because they have lost their dominant position on both of these fronts.Bingo. So, newspapers, beware of thinking that you can get away with charging for content. All you're really doing is shrinking that community, and taking away the real reason you had a business in the first place.
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
newspapers
The explosive increase in "Media Studies" courses at all levels of education have led to thousands of dullards mistakenly believing they are God's gift to journalism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why newspapers are failing
The movie industry didn't destroy that. Radio didn't destroy that. TV didn't destroy that.
The internet did. The internet is much more efficient than printing news on paper and delivering it the next day via trucks and cars.
So right now we have thousands of printers, aka, newspaper publishers, who have nothing to print because no one is reading their prints and no one is paying for their prints via advertising.
We're in a transitional stage. People always panic during these times because people inherently fear not knowing the future. Some large cities might be able to support the printed news. The vast majority will not. Within a decade most people will not even remember a time when we read newspapers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People who chime in here may not be aware of the number of elements that go towards producing a day's edition. There are reporters, editors, photographers, designers, columnists and special correspondents involved. A paper with 50 staff means anywhere between 3 million and 5 million dollars a year in salaries alone, if not more! So, the question is: can a paper generate enough to stay afloat in the current market? Will the death of the weaker papers result in consolidation, with the bulk of the country's newspapers in the hands a few tycoons? Is that a good thing?
Answers, anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What will most likely rise in the place of big newspapers, is smaller community newspapers with lots of volunteers, or community websites. I can imagine a website called TownHallMeeting.com, which reports on municipal government affairs country-wide.
Democracy requires that the people make an effort to be informed. Previous generations had a free ride, with ad-sponsored news. Our generation will actually have to do some work; we can't just sit on our couch yelling "inform me!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But one thing's for sure. Unless you figure out how to generate 3-5 million, the current model of journalism is on its way out.
"What will most likely rise in the place of big newspapers, is smaller community newspapers with lots of volunteers, or community websites"
We'll have to see how sustainable that is. The model works for wikipedia, but can volunteers keep a "newspaper" alive?
Perhaps the journalist profession will soon become a dodo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Here's something to ponder: Will a centralized news industry even be necessary anymore?
The whole point of a singular news company was that it was convenient for the customer. All the information would be in a single place, meaning you only had to pick up a single newspaper.
Today, though, when was the last time you only visited one news source? Sites like TechDirt point you to hundreds of articles, Google gives you hundreds of readily available sources, and many times you don't even have to seek out news stories, you'll just stumble across them.
Not to say that this is a good or bad thing for the flow of information, but it's a massive change. I don't think the newspaper industries have really realized this, though, because they're still trying to compete for sole viewership.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The newspapers made a profit on the subscriptions but the cost of the subscription was to cover the operating costs. The initial purchase of equipment, maintenance, people actually delivering the newspaper, etc.
When I was a kid it was common knowledge that they had gotten all of this down to a fine art and the subscription fees were marginal compared to the amount of money they raked in from the paid advertisements.
Of course people will only pay for advertising spots if people actually go to your site/read your newspaper. People are still getting news so obviously there are places where people go to look at articles ERGO there are places to view ads next to what people are reading THERE FOR the newspaper business will remain mostly the same, however there will fewer big name news distribution sites as the market will make it quite tight for them.
However relatively small time blogs, local websites, etc, will boom in numbers disseminating and commenting on news and directing traffic to big news distribution sites as reference. Note this is what techdirt essentially is and what most blogs do already.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The truth about why they're failing
Everything has already been published before it get published in the papers.
There've only been two incentive to buy newspaper.
To, for having a natural time period about once or twice a day when you were forced to, read crappy written news, and then to be able to wipe your arse.
So essentially it's the booming business of toilet paper that has done the newspaper business in. Internet connected mobile phones just accentuate that.
Hurrah, for the future, eh. We now aren't forced to support a newspaper business (who's 'art' imitates life) by buying the printed crap paper, and risk getting home made smeared tattoo of Britney between our buttocks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The truth about why they're failing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Newspapers as ad vehicles
Do they make quality news? No. Are they "newspapers of record"? Hell no! But the formula works. They are there when people are bored with nothing to do, commuting or in a waiting room, and usually have at least some mildly interesting stuff to make people want to browse them. They capture that audience and sell it to advertisers.
There are also companies here using "news" to make flyers/catalogs more interesting. Lidl, a chain of supermarkets of German origin, wraps their weekly catalogs (inserted in thousands of mailboxes) in several pages of a basic newspaper/magazine. There's always a celebrity interview, some news, funny stories, comics, puzzles, etc. It's another example of free content paid by advertising.
The major (paid) newspapers also understand it's important to give people "reasons to buy" beyond news. They often make bundles with books, DVDs, tools, silverware, jewelery, etc, for a couple more euros or at no extra cost. It's all about circulation. How many eye balls they get on ads.
So why are so many newspaper people in the US unable to see things aren't that much different online? What matters are page views. How many people view the ads and potentially click on them. The difference is, newspapers can't "force" themselves in front of people (short of spamming). So aggregators, blogs, etc, that send people to newspaper websites are truly their friends, not enemies. And like bundling goodies in the offline world, they must give reasons (beyond news) for people to go back to their sites again and again. Build a community like Techdirt says all the time. Perhaps online versions of puzzles with score rankings that foster competition. Perhaps encouraging discussion around the news. Etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Times are changing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Save the newspaper; get a great design (video)
Design can save the Newspaper
http://graphicstart.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=292
[ link to this | view in chronology ]