Clearly, newspapers have been in trouble for some time. What went wrong?
A combination of technology trends and boneheaded business moves killed newspapers. As somebody who started his career and spent about six years in the newspaper business, let me try to analyze the Top Five Newspaper Killers:
1.Craigslist
Obviously a big one, because classified ads were once the mainstay of local newspaper advertising revenue. Once Craigslist siphoned off most of that, it put pressure on everything else. The irony? Craig Newmark still runs his company as a lean community-friendly ungreedy operation. Imagine if he had decided to become as big as Google (Nasdaq: GOOG)? Newspapers would really be dead.
2. Google
OK, another "No-duh" moment. Google has tapped the revenue stream of all content companies by becoming a "technology widget" that sits between the buyer and seller. But the real killer here is that major news organizations co-opted Google's ability to step in the ad revenue stream by giving away lots of their content for free and striking terrible syndication deals.
3. Internet-phobia
In the early days, newspaper executives and other print operations dismissed the Internet, fighting rather than embracing it. It wasn't part of their culture. Think if they had been more aggressive in building out their local Internet presences and making their brands more global. It's not too late, though. Newspapers still have strong brands and Internet technology is now cheaper than ever.
4. The "Bill Simmons" effect
I love the sports columnist Bill Simmons. And his story may be a parable for the newspaper industry. Bill Simmons famously could not get a sportswriting job at The Boston Herald newspaper. So he quit the newspaper business and started a blog, which became wildly popular. Now he runs his own mini sports content empire from a base on ESPN's Page 2, has millions of readers, has a #1 bestselling book, and I'm sure he gets paid handsomely -- more than he would ever get paid by a newspaper union. The story points to the newspaper industry's inability to capitalize on Internet-optimized writing talent -- or writing talent of any kind, really.
5. Unions
Much like the car industry, the newspaper business is plagued by the inflexibility and burden of labor unions. While paying people a decent salary and benefits isn't a bad thing, unions don't help things out when your industry is being restructured in real time. Take this, and compare it with the Internet industry, where the compensation packages are often tied to stock and growth, and you have a recipe for disaster for the newspaper business.
So what's next? Some franchise newspaper brands that are still investing in their Internet operations have a shot. USA Today made some progress with a new Internet-embracing design. Internet ad revenue is finally starting to helpThe New York Times' profitability. Then, of course, there's Rupert Murdoch's famous efforts to drive more paid subscription models through his acquisition of The Wall Street Journal.
Local and regional newspapers, are, of course, in a tougher spot. They have less resources and suffer more severely from the "Craigslist" effect. In addition, they are coming under assault from the "Patch" syndrome, in which large Internet operations such as AOL and The New York Times go after local markets.
What's the solution? Hire some Internet-savvy people, find a way to build low-cost Websites that get the job done, partner with Internet companies on a revenue-sharing basis, and keep tabs on what local advertising partners want from the Internet. There is still a lot of opportunity in regional publishing worlds for media companies that want to embrace the Internet in a creative way and utilize their local talent to engage with their audience online.
— R. Scott Raynovich is an expert in technology, media, and investment markets.
Yeah. Afterall, what purpose would a detailed article would serve if someone is getting the whole story in real time. Even if sometimes you want to follow up, you dont have time for that. And I think that this is one of the fundamental hurdle. As a matter of fact, printed media cannot compete with digital media when it comes to news, but research and studies still have some room in printed media. Therefore for newspapers, it is need of time to reinvent the business model to stay in business.
I think part of my point is that not everyone has the same priorities. You point out the start of war as bad news. Is it? Was it bad news that the USA attacked Afghanistan after the attacks on us on 9-11-2001?
We do indeed agree that there is a deficit in the journalism "biz" today. I saw another example of what is lacking last night on my local news. The two anchors were speaking with a local talk radio host about the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, AZ. I don't have the transcript, but it went something like this:
Anchor 1: Don't you agree that the tone of political discourse in this country is too harsh and too angry, and that this inspired the shooter?
Host: It's starting to look like this shooter has mental issues, possibly full-blown schizophrenia. I don't think his actions were at all based on the political atmosphere in this country.
Anchor 2: But you would agree, wouldn't you, that the use of target crosshairs by Sarah Palin on Congresswoman Giffords' district could certainly be seen to advocate, or at least be permissive of hate?
Host: Actually, the Democrat Legislative Council has used the same icon to mark districts targetted as well. Also, writings were found from Rep. Giffords that go back 3 or more years. This man seems to have been mentally deranged, and already had his mind on Gabbie Giffords wel before that map.
For three or four minutes, these hosts, despite all the concrete evidence being placed before them, tried to advance the idea that this shooting was about some perceived rancor in American political discourse (whether correct or not).
I'm going a bit off topic with that example, since that's TV news and not newspaper. Newspapers, however, are also trying to create this discussion from an incident that now seems to pretty clearly have nothing to do with that issue.
So, now that I've become long-winded again, I agree that there is a need for honesty and integrity in journalism, and that there is a deficit in that. I'm just not seeing the realization among journalists themselves.
Since the times of the ancient Greeks people were more attracted to see tragedies than comedies. Philosophers along history have wondered about this.
Aristotle's theory was that tragedy stimulates a feeling of catharsis. But if I recall correctly, Epicures had a different point of view. He believed the reader/viewer enjoyed knowing he was not the one who was caught up in the tragedy. That would be the feeling many have when reading bad news -- so glad I was not the one stuck on a train for 7 hours / stuck in the airport for 24 hours with no food / stuck without electricity for 2 days, etc.
The good news that we are exposed to often is issued by the agency that has something to gain from it -- like the school whose students volunteered, the store that donated food, or the politician who wants to claim credit for having handled a crisis well.
Think of this as an experiment: If only for one day the newspapers would publish only good news and good stories from around the globe and the news channels would do the same, what would people react? What would people complain about, what would they talk about over breakfast, at work or on FB? How would a day being fed with good news only would affect the whole population?
Another experiment could be to have two newspapers published on the same day: one featuring good news on the front page and the other one bad news. Which one would sell more?
You say: Not everyone agrees what is good or bad news.
I would say that statement is somehow relative. I see your point. Nevertheless, if one day you wake up and read in the newspaper that a war has started somewhere I would dare to guess that you are not going to think that is good news. At least, no one should think people dying in a war is good news.
Or constantly reading about accidents, or murders. When do you see news about scientific discoveries as a headline? A new drug for the cure of cancer or some other illness. What about people doing good things and being in the news instead of the ones who are in the news because they killed someone. Killing someone means instant fame and thousands of followers willing to know more. Is that what you want in your morning news?
I understand and agree with you, Rob. I just can't agree with rating being more important than journalistic integrity and principles. Once again I am here talking about journalistic principles. Not long time ago I heard from a journalist that he had lost his integrity after many years of journalism. I couldn't agree with that either. Honestly, I prefer to be a journalist with integrity and principles, whose work is not on the front page and/or cover but who feeds readers with good news, rather than one who gives up integrity and principles to see her name on a front page. And who knows, one day things might change.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one," as John Lennon said. As an example of all this, he was killed and his killer jumped into fame.
Don't you think that (your first paragraph) describes a very pathetic condition and nature of some human beings? For anything in this world I would like to be too close to someone who fits in that description. If someone is so unhappy with his life he should try to do something about it and fix it to make it happier. Happiness doesn't grow as flowers, it grows inside the person and that is what people hardy understand. Most people expect happiness to knock on the door while they are sitting doing nothing other than waiting and complaining about how unhappy they are. Finding comfort in reading or watching or knowing about other people's unhappiness is not only sick but also shows little or no sense of ethics, empathy and good values as a human being, which by the way are in extinction.
Moving outside the comfort zone demands strength, intelligence and strong will and determination. If someone is unable to show these characteristics, how much would you trust the person to lead a company or have a high position? When wondering about how things go in the world it is good to have a look at these smaller things. You easily can then see the answers.
Yes, you are right. People read bad news, go to work and talk all day about them and they seem to be happier and comforted, as you say. Now, is this good. No. It is pathetic. Those people are pathetic to me. Why? Because they are not able to deal with their own lives and need the suffering of others to feel good about themselves. As a journalist, I will never report any bad news which could serve those pathetic people to escape from their own lives. Isn't it better if they read good news and feel motivated, inspired to do something good for and by themselves?
Why is it so hard to feel happy for someone else's happiness? Why selfishness is such a strong feeling? Why bad emotions seem to win over the good emotions? What kind of beings make up this society? What have we learned in thousands of years of pathetic world history? When is all this going to change?
Since the times of the ancient Greeks people were more attracted to see tragedies than comedies. Philosophers along history have wondered about this. Now, just think of today's bad news in the newspapers as the old Greek tragedies and the good news as the Greek comedies. There is no difference in behavior from part of the audience. Nothing has changed.
Happiness is an attitude which can only be found within the person.
Susan, I know exactly what you mean about being deluged by a flood of bad news. It paints a very bleak picture, which is not completely accurate. The problem is the adage "no news is good news" assumes that bad events are more newsworthy. Perhaps that is due to our expectation that things should be running well, and it is a newsworthy event to report when they go otherwise. Disasters are minefield of such news. In the New York area, people are still going over whom to blame for the snow remaining an obstacle on the roads for so long last week. I'm sure there are a few stories of people who helped the snowbound without payment, but people seem to devote far more attention to the question of the sanitation workers deliberate lack of activity that kept the streets blocked for far longer than people expected in a major city. The places where you are more likely to find good news are the local papers which like to highlight positive community involvement.
It is the journalists and editors' responsibility to feed the readers with a wide variety of different types of news. And most importantly, a balance between good and bad news.
Not everyone agree what is good or bad news. The START nuclear arms reduction treaty was recently ratified by the Senate in the USA. Some people think that's good news, some think it's bad. I'm not really here to discuss the how and why of either stance. Simply pointing out that it isn't as easy as simply deciding to have more of one or the other.
Also, this goes back to one of the first points I raised in this conversation: that sometime in the 1970's or 1980's, news divisions ceased to be independent divisions and were placed under the entertainment division, where ratings, not mere journalistic integrity, largely defined failure and success. News shows like Good Morning America and Today have changed out their whole on-air staff over ratings. and while we all complained about our exhaustion with the OJ Simpson murder case, we kept buying the papers and the magazines that put OJ on the front page and/or cover.
As long as ratings is king, ratings will determine the coverage. And so Lindsay Lohan will sell more papers than good Samaritans.
What you say is very true...Most people are very unhappy with their current lives and would rather see other people who are worse of than themselves rather than doing something to improve their own lives,primarily because it means moving outside their comfort zones.
Very few people appreciate and accept this fact.Thats why Bad news sells more than Good news .
People read the bad news and feel comforted,Hey My life may not be rocking!! But atleast its better off than that bloke who got Blown up/shot/cut up on TV[I am sure you get the gist].
People should never forget it is entirely in their hands to be happy and content with their lives.If they are'nt they have the power to choose to get out of their comfort zone,work hard and make themselves a success.Or else they can tune into the nightly news...
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Being the content bigot that I am, I always believe original content has real value, especially if it is good. Might this explain why Internet companies are finally coming around to the fact that they need to fund some original content to keep their business models alive?
The YouKu IPO, covered here a few weeks back, got off the ground on Wednesday with great fanfare, nearly tripling in price in its first day of trading and raising $200 million for the company. Today, shares continued to rocket higher, rising another $9.57, or 28 percent, to $43.01 in late afternoon trading.
AOL Inc. (NYSE: AOL) and Yahoo Inc. (Nasdaq: YHOO) are two of the original Internet stalwarts. In their day, they were the Googles and Twitters of the Internet -- must-own stocks that gave investors big returns during the 1990s. Now it appears that both companies are heading for some serious restructuring, sale, or breakup.
Netflix Inc. (Nasdaq: NFLX) is one of the most interesting developments in the digital content world. Its disruptive model of delivering downloadable content over broadband Internet connections is generating huge profits for the company, and it also points to the economic defects of the net neutrality concept.
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
The whole Amazon.reader debate is a double-stupid. It's stupid to think that there's any e-book buyer who doesn't know Amazon's URL, and it was stupider to let ICANN launch the whole free-form TLD initiative to start with.
While NFC's original goal was to enhance mobile commerce applications, it is finding its way into a number of other uses, which is creating both opportunity as well as challenges for IT departments.
Enterprises would like to move to cloud computing but are hesitant because they are concerned about providers’ ability to secure company data. Here are some tips that help to ensure that if breaches occur, the business is not left holding the bag.
Edmunds separates customers into segments based on the info it collects on its site and from partners, and uses that to push out custom content, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
The automotive website uses propensity modeling to target ads and customer registration forms, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
Subsidized handsets, rather than locked handsets, should be the focus of regulators. We're not getting good deals, not fostering innovation, and weakening our power as buyers.
Expert Integrated Systems: Changing the Experience & Economics of IT In this e-book, we take an in-depth look at these expert integrated systems -- what they are, how they work, and how they have the potential to help CIOs achieve dramatic savings while restoring IT's role as business innovator. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
Email This
