digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at economist.com

Some of America’s most venerable newspapers face extinction

economist.com — Pick almost any American newspaper company and you can tell a similar story. The ABC reported that for the 530 biggest dailies, average circulation in the past six months was 3.6% lower than in the same period a year earlier.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • lucidguru, on 05/02/2008, -9/+4It's good to know that newspapers really aren't making any money online either...
  • oboy, on 05/02/2008, -6/+17Some of my best times in youth were spent sitting down in a lawn chair with a cup of coffee in the day or a beer at night reading a good newspaper or one of the old school magazines like the Atlantic Monthly or The Newyorker. I haven't read anything from a paper publication in forever, unless it's online, of course. Still, it saddens me that we are seeing these venerable old rags failing. They need to adapt. They need to take their great writing and figure out how to expose them to the world of the Internet. Simply putting up a website is just not enough anymore.

    Thanks for listening for my rant.

    JD Rucker - oboy
    • bromac, on 05/02/2008, -2/+5You spent your youth reading newspapers? I'm not saying it's not admirable to be well informed, but I wouldn't call reading a newspaper the most invigorating experience of my youth.
      • fkr3, on 05/02/2008, -5/+6Scary huh? He probably read books too, and not the kind with pictures!

        I think the internet represents a challenge to the newspapers, but the other half of the problem is people just aren't reading as much. They want to consume something in under a minute and if they have to choose between something lame on YouTube or reading 600 words....
        • bromac, on 05/02/2008, -2/+5You missed my point.

          The best times in most people's youth involve enjoying your physically fit bodies, which you lose with age. You can read newspapers and sip coffee when you're 50. It's harder though to play football and hockey, for example.

          The best times in my youth involved inner tubing down white water creeks and reenacting various professional wrestling moves on friends trampolines, along with various other energy-filled activities. Enjoy them while you can.
          • fkr3, on 05/02/2008, -2/+2The best times in anyone's younger years are what they decide, what you want or like isn't necessarily what someone else wants or likes.

            The best times in my youth involved taking turns playing Tie Fighter on my dad's monochrome Compaq laptop at a friend's place, getting trashed and of course, shagging 16/17/18 year olds.
    • humperdeath, on 05/02/2008, -1/+2And I should care? Newspint paper is dirty, and a waste of resources. 90% or more never gets read, so mostly it goes to trash. Put the news online and I'll look at it.
  • ColonelTribune, on 05/02/2008, -1/+9Why, I think some smaller ones are doing a great job. The Bakersfield Californian, for example. Thing is, online ad sales revenue don't even come CLOSE to what you get in newspapers...because advertisers still are unsure about online.
    • ralphthemagi, on 05/02/2008, -4/+1Not if you run a sensationalist ***** blog/news hybrid site like The Raw Story, The Huffington Post, or WorldNetDaily. You just submit your crap to Digg and Reddit, use your Digg army when you have to, and then RAKE in the cash from the massive amounts of impressions you serve.
  • 3style, on 05/02/2008, -2/+6The problem is these brands which are extremely valuable have management that are sticking to the old rules of advertising. The online advertising industry is in it's infancy, if they get some forward thinking marketing execs they will turn around these brands immediately. My opinion is the industry needs to have a standardized rating system that properly gives potential advertisers exact traffic and demographic information, allowing sales people to properly market the websites or pages to advertising clients.
    • seanruiseil, on 05/02/2008, -0/+0Agree completely. If the Huffington Post can invent itself online, why can't the NYT reinvent itself?
  • str3ama, on 05/02/2008, -6/+31ha ha ..their medium is dying.
    • lonedust, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3Nelson!
    • scstraus, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1Is it too much to ask that they take the horrible cable news with them, or even better, throw them under the tracks?
  • cdstaff, on 05/02/2008, -4/+7Its that damned internets fault
  • geoffg, on 05/02/2008, -3/+8Who will tell us what to think to make the world a better place? :'(
    • WoollyMittens, on 05/02/2008, -3/+5Why... Fox news of-course.
    • troye, on 05/02/2008, -1/+3Who is digging this guy down?

      He is true you know - to an extent. Big Media does shape and mould people of all ages. And now via web comments people can know what other people around them and around the globe are thinking, not just what a couple of rich people are thinking. With the internet, people are better able to ask questions and scrutinize the news.

      I think this is good for us Humans in perspective. These newspaper companies just have to get with the changing ecosphere, which is "more online stuff" or "publish online and don't neglect the internet."
      • userperson, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3This seems to make a lot of sense on the face of it but then I think of digg...
        • troye, on 05/02/2008, -1/+1Yes, but then we just have to fight the stupid people off the "internetz," or make them smarter somehow.
  • GregLoire, on 05/02/2008, -1/+7I doubt there's anything they can do about this. I graduated from college about 2 years ago, and I don't know a single person around my age who actually subscribes to a print newspaper. The entire medium will likely die out along with the current subscribers, as I doubt the upcoming generation is going to provide enough subscription revenue for them to stay afloat.
    • cubicledrone, on 05/02/2008, -5/+1The upcoming generation can't read, so who cares? People really think we're going to still have a country in 20 years. They really do. Really.

    • thescimitar, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2I'm about your age probably (26) and I just subscribed to a paper. I do most of my work and spend much of my life online. In the wake of all that, it's really kind of relaxing to pick up a physical paper, sit back in a chair, and just read. I take my paper to work, and read it during lunch, in my studio, or outside, wherever. I realize that few people put much stock in the enjoyment of this sort of simple pleasure, but I've found it relaxes me quite a bit. I also retain considerably more of what I read in a paper than what I read online, for whatever reason.
  • akatsuki, on 05/02/2008, -1/+21well, that is what happens when you stop reporting news and just reprint AP newswire stories and don't do any real investigative work or pick controversial positions that might offend advertisers.
  • prophet5, on 05/02/2008, -2/+13People aren't fooled by their lies - they just move on....
  • TalenGTP, on 05/02/2008, -4/+22dugg for New York Times going into the *****
  • eyefone, on 05/02/2008, -1/+9Internet *****, do you use it?
  • SymbolicChaos, on 05/02/2008, -2/+1I work in IT for a newspaper and it's all very true. The newspaper industry has been on an extreme decline for the last few years. We've had multiple websites for years, but we just made the jump to shooting videos for online content. Things like that help, but the actual physical publication and ads sold within that are where the money is.
    • cubicledrone, on 05/02/2008, -2/+2Where the money is is hiring a ***** reporter and letting them report the ***** NEWS.
      • SymbolicChaos, on 05/02/2008, -0/+4I see your point, sir, and in a utopia where everyone does everything for free without want for compensation, this amazing theory on making money might be possible. But not here. Also, the Journal I work for has 41 publications and puts it on your lawn for free. SO, the advertisements really ARE the only way we make money and keep the newspaper going (ergo, the reporters reporting).
        But what a wonderful comment, and thanks for the intelligent, well-though-out feedback.
      • cubicledrone, on 05/02/2008, -1/+2Advertisements are not the only way you make money. When your CIRCULATION goes up, your AD RATES go up. Want to know how to increase circulation?

        Hire a ***** reporter and let them report the ***** NEWS.

        Thank you.
        • SymbolicChaos, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1You're quite unwelcome. I've gotten to know our large number of reporters at all 7 locations through-out the metro area, and they are awesome. They have a respectable sense of humor, are very good writers, have been in the business for decades, and tell stories that the individual communities benefit from. Lots of positive reporting, lots of important, non-sensationalist reporting.

          And I guess I have to state it again. Our CIRCULATION is EVERYONE in the entire metro area that hasn't specifically told us not to throw a paper on their lawn. This is a FREE newspaper, supported only by ads, that is thrown on EVERY persons' doorstep. So CIRCULATION is the SAME ACROSS THE BOARD NO MATTER WHAT.

          Does capitalizing the words help you any? Am I speaking your one-track-minded language yet?
        • modad, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1cubicledrone is right, at least for the newspapers in my region. The first thing they cut down on is the newsroom, while the ad department gets beefed up. I have no problem with increasing the ad department, but if there's no product (i.e.no news) then no one wants the paper. They'll usually just focus on using AP or Reuters stories, which is the same content you can get anywhere else, including online. The local angle is sacrificed, and it hurts circulation. And to reply to SymbolicChaos, not every newspaper is pickup driven, as is the case in many metro areas (love reading the paper on the subway). In non-metro areas, it's all about subscription, so they're hurting extra bad.
  • mooseontheloose, on 05/02/2008, -2/+24Good. Reporting these days is a joke. It's all just copies of AP newswires and lame human interest stories about celebrities.
  • dougs55, on 05/02/2008, -1/+4This is an old recurring story. The newspapers problems aren't craigslist or bloggers either, they just aren't doing the job you'd expect them to do in a democratic country.
  • DeFex, on 05/02/2008, -3/+4They should start reporting news again instead of what their advertisers and corporate bosses tell them to,

    trees and garbage picker uppers will be happy anyways.
  • cmuwriter, on 05/02/2008, -3/+7People can blame this on shoddy reporting all they want – and to be sure that is the case with some of these newspapers. But our culture many people are: a. too fast paced to stop, sit down and read a newspaper, b. too caught up on celebrity *****, which can easily and quickly be read about in various blogs, which don't follow AP style or follow journalistic rules or standards, c. Caught up in asinine reality television shows about flava flave or baking cakes or finally d. Unable to read at the level the newspaper is offering news. For Christ sake, we already write at a 10th grade reading level.

    On a whole, we care more about ***** Hanna Montana's bare back, than we do about atrocities being committed in different parts of the world. We would rather watch some show about building motorcycles or ***** about a Jewish American Princess sweet 16 party.
    • cubicledrone, on 05/02/2008, -2/+1The reason we're in such a hurry is because we have to get back to work and gather round a fat management ass for the rest of today's seven hour mandatory meeting. You know I'm right.
  • winnestow, on 05/02/2008, -5/+5conservative talk radio is the best medium
  • drake77, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1e-readers ftw?
    • troye, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1cellphones as e-readers that report real news.

      PDF on smartphones is cool, but I can scroll better if I view it in good ol' HTML. The web is the future my friend, the web.
  • DiggOrNotToDigg, on 05/02/2008, -2/+6“In nature, it’s not the strongest nor the most intelligent who survives. It’s the most adaptable to change”, Charles Darwin

    Sorry to say newspapers didn't adapt well to the changes. Plus some are printing more propaganda that real news.
  • jabberwolf, on 05/02/2008, -4/+7Can we hope and pray the Hufftington post dies, implodes, gets buried in an earthquake, gets 1 billion paper cuts and dies an agonizing death?! Please, is it too much to ask?!
  • cubicledrone, on 05/02/2008, -1/+3Oh, I'm going to take a wild guess here. Is it because nobody reports news any more? Is it because management (there it is again, middle management clogging the toilet with their bald heads) don't let journalists be journalists? Is it because they can't write a headline? A real news lead? How about a story without opinion? Or a smartass comment? Or a failed attempt at humor? Or a hype-phrase like "memory-hungry" or "risk-averse" or "profit-minded?"

    You know, if a young reporter got a hold of a real story in this country, they'd be smothered in FAT management ASS so fast it would turn your hair white.

    If you are a "journalist" and you categorize people as consumers, or use advertising slogans like "choosy moms" or "savvy shoppers," or if you misuse phrases like "begs the question," misspell five-letter words or put question marks in your headlines, you are a failure. You are illiterate, and nobody gives a ***** what you write. You should be fired and your newspaper should be bulldozed.

    Can we see one story, just one, with a correct headline, that is hard news start to finish and is written by a journalist who has a clue? We won't, and that's why nobody reads newspapers. The end.
  • Elliottx, on 05/02/2008, -2/+1Venerable...The Pope approved of these newspapers did he? ^_^
  • insonh, on 05/02/2008, -2/+6it couldn't be because they don't report the news could it?

    an opinion isn't news and neither is anything involving some self centered druggie from the entertainment field


  • ugmold, on 05/02/2008, -2/+7They deserve it
  • whorn76, on 05/02/2008, -1/+3Damn global warming...
  • dan222555, on 05/02/2008, -6/+5It's no surprise that as newspapers like the NY Times or the LA Times have shifted their ideological coverage of the news further and further to the left, their circulation has gone down. It's the same reason the American people have rejected far left media outlets like MSNBC and Air America radio. The media in America is shifting further and further left and the American people are letting them know they don't like it.
    • cubicledrone, on 05/02/2008, -4/+0Yeah, left vs. right has done so much for the country. Let's do that for another 20 years. Let's make up names to call the "other side."
      • dan222555, on 05/02/2008, -1/+5That's the point isn't it? The American people want news that's reported without bias.
    • reed311, on 05/02/2008, -4/+2You folks have always claimed that every single media outlet that has ever existed has a left-wing bias. If you think there has been more of a shift lately, it would be because of Bush and his failed Presidency. It is the job of the media to report on his failings and to a Conservative, it would probably come of as having a liberal slant. However, if you were old enough to remember the Clinton days; the media used to hammer the ***** out of him as well. Bush got a free pass for a few years after 9/11, but now that the 9/11 honeymoon period has passed he is free game again.
      • dan222555, on 05/02/2008, -2/+4It's about so much more than just being critical of the President. There shouldn't be any doubt in anyone's mind that the media in this country has shifted further and further to the left in recent years.
    • itsontheway, on 05/02/2008, -4/+2Liberal bias = Myth; one of the biggest conservative talking points ever. Think about; they've been repeating that same point for roughly 30-40 years. People have heard it so many times that they believe it. If there is any bias in this medium, it is towards reporting the absurd and not the relevant.
  • toastgodsupreme, on 05/02/2008, -1/+1Evolution, survival of the fittest. When TV came about the radio died off and had to change. No longer were full shows done via radio, they moved to the TV.

    As time moves on, technology changes things. Some things become obsolete. Just because something was once a large part of our culture, doesn't mean we should do everything in our power to make sure it stays.

    The newspaper is on it's way out. It's not obsolete yet, but people are getting their news other ways now. It was nice to be able to read a paper while taking a dump, but now I have my iPod, Maxim, or whatever else should I feel like I'm going to be a while.
    • Abomonog, on 05/02/2008, -1/+1But radio hasn't died off. There are still stations out there that do full radio shows despite television. Radio has just become a medium for a different kind of entertainment, music. The newspaper will not die either (not until paper is replaced entirely anyways), but it will change to be other than just a news service.
      • toastgodsupreme, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2But the medium has changed. Radio isn't what it used to be. You have to remember that before tv, radio shows (real shows, like, a series) were the thing. Those died out.

        I feel the newspaper will die out completely though eventually. There's nothing it can really evolve into.
  • zeebusboy, on 05/02/2008, -1/+3Die you lying motherfsckers! You will not be missed.
  • DrPh0bius, on 05/02/2008, -0/+0Feh.
    I imagine that there were stories lamenting the imminent death of the Victrola as the more modern phonograph became viable... and cries of "what will we do with the horse teams" as the horseless carriage began to come into its own.
    Time moves forward, if ideas dont also move forward, they are left behind. many of us share memories of reading the paper, but I also have memories of rectal thermometers as a child, and
    Im not looking for a company to try and popularize adult rectal thermometers!

    Its time for newspapers to rethink their medium and try to become competitive in the 21st century, instead of lamenting their own decline and trying to convince us that they are still viable.
  • shyboy2008, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2Kindles are the future of newspaper
    • troye, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1*****!


      My smartphone is the future of reading news. Just put it in HTML please.
  • paulmer2003, on 05/02/2008, -2/+1Tbh, I enjoy reading my newspaper while I drink some OJ and eat breakfast. Much more rewarding than sitting around in a chair reading teh innertubez. I'll always have a newspaper subscription.
    • troye, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2buried
      • paulmer2003, on 05/02/2008, -3/+1For what? If your going to say "buried", than at least explain why. Troll.
  • quiggibub, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3I'll be happy when I see one of my local papers go away. Unless Al-Qaeda decides to bomb Troy, NY while insulting Joe Bruno AND the police chief, that paper won't have anything more informative than a 2 paragraph column.
  • gtlogic, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2It's all about progress. These writers will be better off doing something else. Like writing the script for GTA5.
  • tbhurst, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2Why is that happening? Yes, of course the internet is the primary driver. But have you seen the size of the Sunday paper lately? And it's all classifieds, cars, and real estate. I am reluctantly about to cancel my Denver Post even though I thin it's a good paper - just because of all of the ads and waste.
    • troye, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1Grannies and grandpa's will continue to read news in paper format for the next coming decades.

      While the younger generation, will be reading news the second it gets retrieved by their RSS feed fetcher on their mobiles (smartphone for me).
      • Jashobeam5, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Senior citizens are also dropping their subscriptions. One reason is because they can check the obits online in most areas. I'm going to wager that news on cellphones is going to go out of fashion.
  • ArachnidDude, on 05/02/2008, -0/+0Trust. Local politics keep them from being trustworthy news sources. My theory.
  • whatthefu, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1Many newspapers consistently produce a large amount of quality articles each and every day. I don't understand what people have against them, especially in a world of blogs and 24-hour news networks.
    • 1randomguyO8, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1You can get quality articles on the internet aswell. I think the newspapers are just worried that they cant get webpages 3/4 full of advertising.
  • 1randomguyO8, on 05/02/2008, -1/+1No wait lets cut down thousands, if not millions of trees process those trees into paper then hire a dozen or two people to run a factory to print the papers. Then drive hundreds of kilometers to deliver your papers, when you could just post the text and images on a website.
  • meisalex, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2They just need to put Spider man or Batman on the front page.
  • Kevin108, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3Newspapers are killing themselves as much as being killed by other news mediums. Traditional newspapers come in an unwieldy format, they devote far too much space to advertisements, most writers offer their spin of a given story instead of the facts, they are too expensive and compared to internet news sources, newspapers are untimely and difficult to procure.

    Compared to magazines, reading a newspaper is like unfolding a glove box road map. Newspapers should be printed more like magazines - in a size that's easy to carry with you and in a layout that's easy to pause reading and resume from.

    Newspapers cost too much to be so full of advertisements. Radio has ads and is given to us freely. Likewise for many smaller, local newspapers. Newspapers need to be either free or ad-free.

    Often news web sites and blogs are the only trustworthy and reliable source of real news these days. The larger papers can't offend their precious advertisers and limit what they choose to publish. Also, many writers let their own views, virtues and vices taint their work on such a scale that anything you read in a newspaper requires further research to prove its credibility.

    It's hard to beat free and now. There are so many sources for news and the internet lets readers spend their time choosing which topics they wish to read about. Newspapers are a grab bag. For any given reader of any given issue, there may or may not be something actually worth reading about. Topped with the fact that internet news is available immediately as opposed to sometime tomorrow, newspapers are a dying medium.
  • ogden, on 05/02/2008, -0/+1Out here on the west coast... I find the LA Times to be totally irrelevant. They are as intellectually dishonest as fox news having devoted themselves completely and unquestioningly to a liberal/socialist agenda.

    Just like fox news and the neocons constantly use fear to manipulate people ... every article in the LA times is equally emotionally manipulative tripe about someone (often an illegal immigrant) who just needs tons of tax money.
  • Cornrider, on 05/03/2008, -0/+1The solution: include a 120 page porno section in the back (and a tasty snack) and sales will come back to normal.
  • nightsenshi, on 05/03/2008, -0/+0Well I stand in a unique position in this business - I deliver several papers. I can't elaborate on the situation because I'm not sure if my contract allows it. However I will say that the people at the bottom - those delivering the papers are getting screwed big time right now while the suits refuse to accept the fact that they need to take a pay cut, like we have every year for the last 30.

  • gkiltz, on 05/03/2008, -1/+0The Dead-Tree newspaper is a legacy technology at this point!
    The sooner the newspaper companies establish other sources of revenue, the better their chances of long-term survival. Evolution applies to business as well. You have to adapt!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.