More on the survivability rate of newspapers...this one from Jon Lowder of Winston-Salem, who has some choice words on the possible pre-imminent downfall of the Winston-Salem Journal:
Sadly the newspaper industry is making the same mistake that the music industry made, only 10 years late. They aren't recognizing the market for what it is. They aren't realizing that whether or not there's a printed form of journalism is irrelevant. Paper is a delivery vehicle, same as the airwaves and the internet. They also need to understand that if they pursue the whole watermark thing all they are going to do is minimize their own exposure and tick off their customers. What's important for them to understand is that instead of building walls around their news gardens they need to learn how to take their expertise and their (diminishingly) unique place in society and use every tool available to reach their audience.
I wholeheartedly agree, Jon.
You folks may want to scribble in your calendars tonight's episode of the Charlie Rose Show, in which he'll discuss the future of newspapers. Guests include Walter Isaacson, Mort Zuckerman and Robert Thomson (thanks to The Logistician for passing that on).
E.C. :)
Posts
6 comments:
Jon is very likely right, but what the heck does that mean? "Use every tool available." Rather than generalizations, how about some specific ideas? I realize newspapers have people working on the problem, but outside insights would be very helpful, too.
Ben Ledbetter left this comment on Jon Lowder's site:
As for how to improve the WSJ (Winston-Salem Journal), put in a lot more unique, locally-generated features. I like the suggestion about the type of stories that make people think, that go to the heart of W-S and the rest of the circulation area.
I'm tired of seeing the Journal (and a lot of other papers its size) with nothing but wire content and a bare-bones local offering. What I mean is, there is nothing but meetings, community events, police/fire briefs, game stories, and features that look like they were written in an hour. The stories/columns/opinion pieces that take time are rarely, if ever, there.
I say put three to four issues out a week with most if not all analytical, deeper stories. Fill the holes with the rest.
Put a thinner paper out the other days with just the bare bones like results, police briefs, meetings.
Make the bigger issues ones that readers will want to keep for a couple of days.
Also, the subscription price should be lowered because I don't feel like I'm getting $40 worth of a newspaper per 13 week term.
My suggestion, make the weekday editions 50 cents again and move that quarter over to the Sunday edition, or Saturday and Sunday.
Also, the Journal (and just about any paper for that matter) should hold a town meeting for readers or invite them to sit in on a budget meeting with the stipulation that they keep quiet and listen. Give them time to ask a couple questions after the meeting with the editor.
Ed Cone passes this on from Lex Alexander, and good comments too:
http://edcone.typepad.com/wordup/2009/02/reinventing-newspapers.html
Erik,
Thanks for the link and for sharing Ben's comment, which I think goes a long way to explaining my thinking too. When I refer to using every tool available I'm simply saying that they should be doing podcasts, hosting video, using Twitter, etc. The core information is still the same, but how and when it's delivered changes.
Lex is as smart as anyone I've seen on this stuff. The newspaper folks would be well served to listen to him.
Thanks for the clarification, Jon. I think you're right.
Newspapers on life support?!? Would someone PLEASE pull the plug? Honestly, it would be considered a "mercy killing."
Post a Comment