Is this the future of newspapers?
The "SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER: 1863-2009" is the tribute to the end of a print newspaper. However as it ends the paper era it is asking that all of its loyal readers go to the online version here.
Will it work and is this webpage any different from any other newspaper webpage, and will it retain or repel readers? These questions are up for answering, but what we do know is that ad revenue is down and the operating costs of papers are the same, a lttle lower now that newsprint prices have tumbled, so deficits loom.
Joel Connelly write an op-ed piece extolling the virtue of the new online venture (he would,and as a survivor of the move he'd better make it work to save his job) here . However all of these optimists forget one thing - advertising revenue. You still need lots of it and it's hard to fit it into an online design without becoming overpowering.
I bet the Sun-Media gurus are watching this move very carefully, why else would the new consolidated Northumberland paper have .com in its title. Perhaps the most telling argument against local success in the online edition of both local papers is that the "interactive part" - blogs and comments sections are not well used. Can't say I blame the journos who have been asked to write blogs, what is there to say after you have banged out the maximum number of words for a pay cheque? And checking the names of the commenters there a few who I recognise as being multiple posters - they will comment on all and sundry no matter where the operation is.
Drudge has posted this link wherein former staffers of the Rocky Mountain News, the latest large market newspaper to shut down leaving inhabitants of a large urban area without newspaper coverage, have announced their answer to the problem. They will offer free content but charge a subscription for commentary and special content.
For another in depth look at the problem read this only on the web would you get this much distribution of such a long article (for instance in the NT.com columnists have been told to reduce their contributions from 750 words to 400. An edict like that would never happen online.
Finally back to the top here is a video from Seattle. It may take time to load, it's a busy day in Seattle today!
Will it work and is this webpage any different from any other newspaper webpage, and will it retain or repel readers? These questions are up for answering, but what we do know is that ad revenue is down and the operating costs of papers are the same, a lttle lower now that newsprint prices have tumbled, so deficits loom.
Joel Connelly write an op-ed piece extolling the virtue of the new online venture (he would,and as a survivor of the move he'd better make it work to save his job) here . However all of these optimists forget one thing - advertising revenue. You still need lots of it and it's hard to fit it into an online design without becoming overpowering.
I bet the Sun-Media gurus are watching this move very carefully, why else would the new consolidated Northumberland paper have .com in its title. Perhaps the most telling argument against local success in the online edition of both local papers is that the "interactive part" - blogs and comments sections are not well used. Can't say I blame the journos who have been asked to write blogs, what is there to say after you have banged out the maximum number of words for a pay cheque? And checking the names of the commenters there a few who I recognise as being multiple posters - they will comment on all and sundry no matter where the operation is.
Drudge has posted this link wherein former staffers of the Rocky Mountain News, the latest large market newspaper to shut down leaving inhabitants of a large urban area without newspaper coverage, have announced their answer to the problem. They will offer free content but charge a subscription for commentary and special content.
For another in depth look at the problem read this only on the web would you get this much distribution of such a long article (for instance in the NT.com columnists have been told to reduce their contributions from 750 words to 400. An edict like that would never happen online.
Finally back to the top here is a video from Seattle. It may take time to load, it's a busy day in Seattle today!
It goes on and on today, I guess the failure of the Seattle PI has brought everybody in on the discussion, here is an opinion about how the Internet will save local papers. I can really relate to this one. The hits on this site have doubled in the last two weeks. Now why is that? perhaps local content reigned supreme in the last couple of days!
3 comments:
The hits increased on my site as well, And there is considerable exchange on John Draper's site. It is as if the blogosphere is providing a senate for Cobourg affairs. Unlike the paper-base newspaper, the blogs & web provide a more dynamic content -- no waiting for the next day's paper to see what the reaction is to this or that. The web provides for a much more real-time dynamic.
Back in the day, the Peterborough Examiner contained a page called Lakeshore News. It contained items of interest to Cobourg/Port Hope. It was a sop to assist in a broader distribution of its paper. Although only one page, it was a daily, and not that much happened in Cobourg that was newsworthy. But then again, when the Cobourg paper went daily it provided perhaps two pages of news and 10 pages of advertisements & classifieds. That is being undermined by Craigslist and other providers.
The blogosphere is less constrained by corporate interests and the straitjacket of the human rights commission and their pious Ms Grundy syncphants who swarmed the likes of Gilchrist.
The blog provides participation, and a broader selection of blogs can provide diversity and variety, with John Draper's providing a conservative-side point of view, Ben's blog a more socialist point of view and mine if one wants to indulge a few moments in smart-ass commentary and brilliant graphics.
The Cobourg Daily Star, nee NT, is staffed almost entirely by women, and thereby lost its diversity. The feminist zeitgeist dominates there. Nothing wrong with that, but it does narrow its range and scope of interest.
Of course it does permit male commentary, but then again, when I read Grahame Woods' stuff, I quickly realize he is there because of diminished testosterone levels. Cam Christie is the only possible light for them, but I feel that he is regretably a bit ham-strung by their policies. Ted Amsden would be effective if he were not treated like a stringer there.
I'm certain there will be paper-based publications for quite a while to come -- they don't crash, for one thing.
The paradigm is shifting for newspapers, in part, because new technologies outside the industry are placing huge pressures, as noted by Ben and Wally. What is most interesting is the speed with which bloggers rapidly took over from mainstream media. Most notably, bloggers were able to reveal news the mainstream media was afraid to publish or broadcast.
Yet, it is important to also note the blogsphere is problematic, too. While opinions are important, there are just far too many. It is like standing in the middle of the Rogers Centre with a full house and everyone in the stands is screaming. How is one suppose to find the information or the opinions that are vital and necessary for them to make good decisions and participate in civic life. It is nearly impossible.
The trend is no longer to offer opinions, but to share knowledge. You look at the local bloggers and you notice how much information they share. It is great stuff. Usually, it comes from sources not tapped into by the local press. And, it is through this knowledge sharing that more insight is available. That is why audiences come to these sites.
This brings me to the plight of newspapers.
The old models are dying, if not dead. The news cannot be gathered by one single source for mass ditribution. If news organizations want to survive, they must share the responsibility. It is like an impressionist painting where each dab of colour can be viewed independently, but when standing back, the entire picture becomes clear.
Journalists continue to have a role in this configuration. The journalistic practices of research, interviewing, producing and verifying content is needed. Maybe more than ever considering how much gossip travels around. People need reliable information and the news industry can provide it. However, the current business model will not support it. As long as content is treated like a footnote and journalists are given impossible circumstances to work under without resources or time to do a job properly, then the industry will implode. It will not matter whether it is the Internet or traditional methods that will be used for distribution.
I have always said if the soup in a can is terrible, then the label, the shelf placement and the advertising will not change the fact that the soup is crap. As long as newspapers produce content that is substandard, then nothing can save them. Forget the layout, the name etc.
Journalism will only survive if the news organizations and the community join together for the common goal of informing the people using honesty, integrity, balance, fairness, diversity and accuracy.
As far as the economic model to sustain this initiative goes, that is another blog for another time.
A further note: J-Source, a Canadian journalism website for professionals, educators and students, contains some good material on this topic. It is under "The new localism - who will deliver it?" http://jsource.ca/english_new/detail.php?id=3509
Post a Comment