It's that time again; time for the obligatory review of the year just passed. Every form of media is filling their holiday editions and programs with "looks back" and "best of" listings. My plan was to eschew such conformity, but in the process of playing back the video that's stored in my head, there was one event I found worthy of a year end story...2008 will undoubtedly be remembered for one of the most exciting Presidential races the country has ever seen; and the economy certainly commanded it's share of headlines. From my perspective, 2008 will always be the year that newspapers began their slow fade in to history.
The reality is that few people under the age of 40 sit down in the morning to read a newspaper. It is a ritual unknown to them. Information is consumed through hand held devices and computer screens, the result of which has been the downsizing, demise, and bankruptcy of some of the icons of print journalism.
The newspaper industry has tried every marketing trick in the book to attract a new generation of readers, to no avail. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, and that is exactly what has happened: News organizations are slashing their print operations while building up their websites. The stereotype of the 24/7 news room filled with hustle, bustle, and breaking stories, now only exists in the movies.
The nostalgia, and sadness, I feel over the end of the newspaper era is not just simply a generational pull. I am fearful that we are losing a very important part of who we are as a nation.
An informed citizenry is a vital to a thriving democracy. It is newspapers that have always provided that information in the most unbiased and in-depth way. News is fact based; it is not commentary nor opinion. Blogs are interesting and they serve a purpose, but in most cases they do not replace hard news.
Each time in history that one era ends, (people predicted the end of the world when the horse and buggy were replaced by the automobile), the void is filled by something flashier and faster. The reporters and feature writers who lost their newspaper jobs are starting to migrate online: Sites like Politico are building credibility, becoming the "go to" places on the web for news. While newspapers are laying off en mass, on its employment page, Politico lists three openings for reporters and one for an editor.
Even though I recently became a smart phone devotee, and can now read all the news I want from almost anywhere, I will always long for that rolled up bundle of newsprint at my front door.
Posts
16 comments:
Sorry Pam, that was me, my spelling was Horrible without my glasses!
All I wanted to say was I feel your pain, and regret the inability of the Call to deliver a dry, readable paper to my residence. The Internet definitely changed the rules, but the business model that turned home delivery over to independent contractors (I.E., wannabe Nascar Drivers) didn't help
I fear the death of the news media. Without their presence, although somewhat limited these days, who will hold our government accountable? That goes for local, state and national government. There's something much larger at stake here.
I think the smaller MC is great. I have so much more time now in the morning.
(oozing sarcasm)
Pam,I live out of State and only read the Morning Call on-line.Friends up North tell me the call is not worth buying.To me the news industry is from the bottom up.With newspapers cutting staff local stories never make it to the national market.
Chris,
You point out an overlooked aspect of the newspaper dilemma, not just for the TMC, but across the industry, and that is the issue of distribution.
The neighborhood delivery kid model collapsed not only from inside, but also from the outside...there just weren't that many young people willing to get up at 4:00 a.m. and walk around in the cold. And there is the safety issue: I know I wouldn't let my child walk around alone in the dark anymore.
But the new system isn't working. I know three people who have stopped their subscription because they couldn't deal with the unreliable delivery in their neighborhood.
These are people who WANTED the newspaper and couldn't get it. So if there are three that I know of, there must be many more. That is an unnecessary loss of revenue.
Anon 10:54,
You are right to be concerned.
If our information comes from unreliable and scattered sources, how will we ever be able to form an opinion as to what and with whom we agree? How will we know what issues are worthy of our support or who is deserving of our vote?
RS,
I can't tell you how many times I've heard that comment.
Although TMC may not be formatted the way it used to be, it is still better than no newspaper at all, which is why we should continue to subscribe.
Anon 11:40,
With most regional papers hanging on by a thread, it's impossible for them to be the purveyors of both local and national news.
It used to be that you could pick up any daily newspaper anywhere in the country and find a robust Local and National section; that is no longer the case.
Even the country's "papers of record" like the NY Times and Washington Post have cut staff and coverage.
This is an interesting post. If you'll indulge me I'd like to share my perspective:
I'm all in favor of the death of the newspaper in the near future - as far as I'm concerned, newspapers are wasteful. Not only in terms of paper wasted and garbage generated by people who don't recycle them, but also in terms of wages paid to reporters who merely rework press releases and call it news, or editors who edit the size of articles in order to accommodate advertising, but who don't catch major inaccuracies in the content. If journalists want to do real journalism, do some actual investigative reporting, or even just accurately and regularly cover local news - they will be able to find a market and be profitable with it.
For example, although not my favorite blogger, BOH could, if he wanted to, quit working for the county and blog full-time. He'd easily be able to generate real advertising revenue on his site and with more time to report and write and blog, the increase in content would only serve to increase his readership.
I also think it is important to distinguish between dying newspapers and thriving news organizations. Really we're just talking about a change in format, and I have never really bought into the whole Marshall McLuhan "The Medium is the Message" philosophy.
I feel that I am better informed than ever (not that I ever read the PAPER on a daily basis, but I at least would pick it up a few times a week). I now read the mcall online multiple times a day, the express times (maybe not daily, but probably once a week). Also, I read the wall street journal online, the nytimes online, and reuters online news service pretty much every day. I also read a dozen or so blogs on a weekly basis, as well as several online magazine sites (slate, vanity fair, salon, harpers) on at least a monthly basis sometimes bi-weekly).
Most of those sites have found a way to be profitable and grow in the changing times - some of them still also offer print versions of their content - The Morning Call may not be able to keep up, but that is in large part because their reporting is way sub par, they have long since passed the "acceptable balance" ratio of advertising to content, and their home delivery service stinks. As in the rest of our private-sector businesses, those that change and grow will thrive, and those who try to stick to the same old same old will inevitably fail.
Also, for the record, one of the best pieces I can remember having read in the morning call in at least the last two years was your editorial about the townhome project on the parking authority sites (I think?). Its hard to remember the exact details because when I tried to go back and find the article two or three days later and it had been removed to the paid archives - I was able to find editorials written by others going back for almost two weeks, but yours was not among them - to me this was a totally bogus move by the mcall editorial staff and it really showed their true colors, as far as I was concerned.
NLTP:
Well, we're even. You found my post "interesting". I find your comments "fascinating".
You seem to know a lot about the news business and your reading list is impressive. In fact, you reminded me that I've been meaning to add Slate and Salon to my regulars... Politico and Drudge.
I'm going to move past your ecology issue. To me, that reason is far down on the list of what is wrong with newspapers.
As for the wages paid to reporters, most of them that I know are underpaid for the hours they work. Although I do agree there is not nearly enough good investigative journalism going on anymore, especially from newspapers. Digging out a story seems to have become the purview of the online news sites, many of which you mentioned.
As for Bernie, I'm sure you're right about that one and have told him the same thing myself. BOH is a very good writer and an even better researcher. If he choose to turn his blog into a full time commercial venture I agree it would be successful.
Finally, we are all better informed thanks to the internet. The information that can be consumed online would have taken us hours to read in multiple newspapers, including a trip to a newsstand.
Even with the advantages of the web, I still worry about the voracity of much of the information. Yes, the sites you and I have named appear to be credible. But the critical eye of a really good editor is still one of the most important tools in any news organization...most online content has never passed through that filter.
NLTP:
Regarding your second comment:
It will suffice to say that some of my pieces have remained available longer than others.
Morning Pam,
I wanted to add that the major reason for home delivery was that Mrs C always read the inserts for shopping. That was worthwhile to receive in her eyes.
That the person driving by the house at 85 MPH tossing it out their window into the pond didn't seem to care was the problem.
When we first moved to Trexlertown, a teenager who attende Parkland delivered my paper, and I tipped him generously for running around my house and putting it on the covered porch.
I understand NLTP's ecological concern. Mrs C purchases books by the dozen to read. A few months ago she purchased a "Kindle" and now receives them directly through the Interwebby directly to it.
No printed page, just digital information. She still buys books, but now they aren't taking up space, nor or theyusong a natural resource.
The times they are a changin'!
The continual evolution of technology is a huge factor in the downward spiral of the newspaper industry. The technology seems to be webpage based advertising. This can be a good thing for the news business in-so-much as the income in based on the number of hits. That inspires competition.
Contributing to the vanishing hard print media :
* India for customer service
* Incorrect subscription prices offered
* Delivery problems
* No hard accentuation on LOCAL news
These problems are not unique to any local paper. It is a problem being faced nationally.
EXAMPLE OF A FAILED BUSINESS MODEL:
The "Bethlehem Globe" prematurely gave up the ghost when it forced customers to subscribe to the Sunday paper whether they wanted it or not in their attempt to out gun the Morning Call while the MC still allowed al carte subscriptions. Much like the cable companies that are forcing subscribers to pay for unwanted channels. This business model too will lead to their weakening against the mighty internet programming delivery system. But that's another matter [I digress].
ON A POSITIVE NOTE:
The future requires [in my opinion] of these publishers:
* A highly skilled web design team
* A dedicated sales force solely aimed at gathering internet ad revenue
TRANSITIONING THE BUSINESS:
* A rich content should be available on the website that wouldn't be published in the paper itself. By using footers on the published hard copy articles one could steer people onto the website for greater information [generating more hits for revenue as well]. The web advantage is that each sq. inch of paper have cost related considerations The website however can have an infinite amount of publication with little or no costs related to the number of pages. In fact with each page clicked revenue would be generated!
* The site should be enhanced by a saturation of local news beyond press releases and replaced with deeper penetration behind the stories. Perhaps under direct 'web editor's' control a team of reporters paid per diem such as BOH, Armstrong, & others current bloggers/writers [both conservative/liberal/in-between].
* Currently the burden of each reporter is to come up with something on a hard schedule at hard costs to the papers' budgets. News ebbs and flows and a handful of reporters simply can't fill pages.
Perhaps culling out past 'letters-to-the-editor' writers, one could offer monetary rewards to those who have had well written, informative, factual information. In this manner the paper would have 100's of freelance reporters on per diem. Thus resulting in greatly expanding the papers coverage abilities far beyond an fixed number of dedicated writers.
BTW: The Express-Times offers voluntary buyouts to cut costs
Monday January 05, 2009, 2:36 PM
Click On My Name
Post a Comment