Comments on: Nobody Cares About Newspapers

By: Cassie

Cassie — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:06:13 +0000

Working in the circulation office of my hometown newspaper, I see what is happening more and more. With online media, it is so easy as many of you have mentioned to get worldwide news online. But what about the feel-good stories about local events? They wouldn’t appear online. How often do you do something in your community worthwhile and then it appears online?

By: Clint Armistead

Clint Armistead — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 20:24:15 +0000

I am one of the many who sees a need for unbiased, investigative journalism but also doesn’t want to pay for it. And to the dying newspaper industry, I say, “All good things must come to an end.” And to add another cliche, “When God closes a door, He opens a window.”
The age of e-Newspapers can actually be seen as a good thing. Old-time reporters might have to adjust the way they operate, but their professions are still intact. They can even get paid without me having to feed their paycheck. Or at least directly.
With the decrease of tangible newspapers, we’ve seen an increase in effective, interactive online advertisements. Online news now depends entirely on it advertising, not subscription. Is that a bad thing? The News/info guys just move their business to a new medium and the PR/Ad guys get access to a whole new playing feel with seemingly limitless possibilities. Sure the consumer becomes more dependent on those pesky pop-ups, but a little stimulation in our economy might not be such a bad thing. I might not want to pay for the news, but if i see a cool ad for Snuggies while reading about the Somali pirates….

By: Danielle Straub

Danielle Straub — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:51:46 +0000

I love getting my national and international news from online news sources (i.e. cnn.com and nytimes.com), but I still enjoy my printed newspaper for local news, opinions and classifieds. I hate having to pay for a print copy though. And in times like these, every penny counts! So I usually read my university’s twice-a-week publication, since it’s free. Unfortunately, most print newspaper readers do not have that luxury.

By: Reports of the Newspapers’ Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated | Fresh Ideas

Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:31:36 +0000

[...] reader commented that since the demise of the Seattle’s Post-Intelligencer (print edition) that it’s [...]

By: jcorn1 (jcorn1)

jcorn1 (jcorn1) — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:43:29 +0000

Twitter Comment

@chrisbrogan, @tdefren: retweeting, thanks, future of journalism, [link to post] Writers, read this!

- Posted using Chat Catcher

By: The death of newspapers « The Marketing PAD

The death of newspapers « The Marketing PAD — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:35:24 +0000

[...] of my Twitter friends Todd Defren of Shift Communications, conducted an informal poll in Twitterland about the state of the newpaper [...]

By: Dan Greenfield

Dan Greenfield — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:05:45 +0000

What I find interesting is that newspaper readership may be declining but so many clients still care about placement in publications to measure success. More people are still more likely to brag about a mention in the New York Times than a mention on a blog. Placement is still king. At least when it comes to senior management, newspapers still matter.

By: Jeff Grass

Jeff Grass — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 18:56:22 +0000

Many people fail to really think about what a world without newspapers would look like. Those same people don’t really understand how valuable “real” journalism is – especially at the local government level.

Most national news, etc. will still get covered thouroghly and newspaper Web sites will provide many journalists a medium to practice their craft. But I think we will see a major decline in stories/articles/reports on what is taking place at the local/ground-level of local politics and legislation.

Suburban journals are dying even faster than major publications. Much of what they cover strictly pertains to local and segmented news. These publications offer PR pros valuable mediums to reach specific audiences. Most suburban journals don’t and may never have Web sites to counter this concern.

We must remember that the concequences of the digital transition may be greater than we expect. There used to be a specific section for op-eds and commentary. Now, most news is being delivered in an op-ed fashion. Personally, I don’t desire to know everyone’s opinion on every topic – just give me the facts, etc.

Still, I am an active member of the online community and enjoy the timeliness and instant gratification of online news, etc.

Just some thoughts.

-JGrass

By: Karen McGrane

Karen McGrane — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:48:09 +0000

The issue of what readers will pay for is much less of a concern than what advertisers will pay for. Subscriptions are not the primary source of revenue for most publications, it’s advertising. And online, advertising is worth roughly 1/10th of what it’s worth in print. Another way to look at that is that your time, your interest, your engagement spent online is valued only 10% of what it’s worth compared to reading a newspaper or watching TV. So the revenue lost due to a decline in print advertising is not being replaced online.

By: Jay Berkowitz

Jay Berkowitz — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 10:09:38 +0000

The internet has disintermediated http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disintermediation 100’s of industries or functions. Google and RSS feeds disintermediated the delivery of news function of the newspapers.

The Kindle threatens to disintermediate the portable pleasure portion @tdefren refers to of ‘taking his New York Times out to his deck’. All that will be left is the nostalgic tactile feel of turning newspaper pages.

@chrisbrogan highlighted the future of journalism. The remaining asset the newspapers own is the independent source of trusted journalism. I believe that to survive, they must reinvent themselves and nurture ‘authority’ and ‘trust’ and learn to deliver it in a Kindle/iPhone world.