Newspapers Are Dying, Blog At 11

The New Yorker is running a long and thoughtful piece by Eric Alterman on the death and life of the American newspaper. It's not news that newspapers are dying, but the acceleration of the process in the last few years is startling: "Independent, publicly traded American newspapers have lost forty-two per cent of their market value in the past three years... The columnist Molly Ivins complained, shortly before her death, that the newspaper companies' solution to their problem was to make 'our product smaller and less helpful and less interesting.'" The article goes on to profile The Huffington Post as exemplar of what is replacing paper and ink. "The Huffington Post's editorial processes are based on what Peretti has named the 'mullet strategy.' ('Business up front, party in the back' is how his trend-spotting site BuzzFeed glosses it.) 'User-generated content is all the rage, but most of it totally sucks,' Peretti says. The mullet strategy invites users to 'argue and vent on the secondary pages, but professional editors keep the front page looking sharp.

Re:Plus Ads

[maxume]

I get a free weekly newspaper that is mostly ads. So they aren't sticking the ads in their to make up for the lack of real content, they are getting paid to distribute the ads to you.

Re:Ha Ha

[capaslash]

Reporter: "Sir, when you talk about Iran, and you talk about how you have diplomatic efforts, you also say all options are on the table. Does that include the possibility of a nuclear strike? Is that something that your administration will plan for?" Bush: "All options are on the table." That option means nuclear weapons. http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0228-28.htm [commondreams.org] Perhaps if you, ah, read a newspaper you'd be aware of such comments. Also, ""If Iran had a nuclear weapon, it'd be a dangerous threat to world peace," Bush said. "So I told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested" in ensuring Iran not gain the capacity to develop such weapons." http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/17/asia/prexy.php [iht.com]

Local News

[MrCopilot]

I live in a small (Pawtucket could kick its ass) rural community. If you want to know about what is going on around here there are 2 places to look, the local newspaper and the bulletin board at the local IGA.

The Newspaper has a cute little 1995 style website, but it is less comprehensive than the paper.

That said, I rarely care what is going on around here, and therefore buy the paper nearly never. Although I do scan the headlines at the convenience store.

The web allows me to read the NYTimes, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, Miami Herald, The BBC and a thousand blogs a week. I love new media, but Ii still respect the old guild.

Re:Ha Ha

[funwithBSD]

See, I would pay for a small town newspaper. What I got instead is the Sacramento Bee, which is mostly a rehash of the AP and Rueters I can get for free and one day earlier.

So I read the SN&R instead, for free. Not the best, not my politics, but almost always worth a read.

Re:On News

[Stiletto]

Is it any wonder? Real news isn't even a large part of what passes for "newsertainment" these days. Let's take a look at and categorize the current headlines on some major US "news" web sites:

CNN.com:

Iraq PM welcomes al-Sadr call; curfews ending
- News, borderline propaganda piece

Home inspection nightmares
- Not news. Fluff piece, mild fear-mongering

March Madness
- Not news. Fluff, Entertainment

Celebrity makeup bag
- Not news. Fluff, Entertainment

FOXNews.com:

Should She Stay or Go? (about Hillary Clinton)
- Not news. Right-wing propaganda piece

'Clear and Present Danger'
- Not news. Right-wing propaganda piece

'Muslims Have Overtaken Us'
- Not news. Right-wing propaganda piece

MSNBC.com:

Proposal would give Fed wide new powers
- Not news. Fear mongering (read it)

Another jobs loss may sink stocks again
- Not news. Editorial speculation.

How Clinton, McCain and Obama would tackle the U.S. economy
- Not news. Political propaganda.

Memphis advances to Final Four
- Not news. Fluff, Entertainment.

USAToday.com:

Al-Sadr pulls militia, offers Iraq deal
- News, borderline propaganda

CIA chief: Al-Qaeda has safe haven
- Not news. Propaganda, fear-mongering

'Killing Fields' survivor passes
- News.

Doubts raised about Vytorin, Zetia
- Not news. Speculative, fear-mongering

Re:Ha Ha

[tezbobobo]

Actually, you're a little wrong. A newspapers printing cost is not in a vacuum. I relies on the greater marketing strategy. There is no way a company like IBM is going to advertise on a local news website. You must get local advertising. To get that you need to show your reaching people in your local area. Click-throughs are great, but not as convincing as saying, "We print 100,000 papers and deliver them to all newspapers in the northern metropolitan area.

Advertising is of fundamental importance, it allows the employ of journalists, graphic designers, printers, admin, call centre staff. Modern newspapers are more about the overarching marketing and advertiser strategies as about news.

People have been predicting the death of the newspaper for a while and it is true that major newspapers are saving a large amount of revenue by going digital. The ball game is entirely different for smaller publications.

PS I am currently Production Manager for a large local publication with a publication run exceeding 120,000 and have worked in newspapers my entire adult life.

Re:you are presupposing some things

[plasmacutter]

Read al franken's lies and lying liars.

there is a very vast right wing propaganda machine.

It's very well funded by a coterie of wealthy individuals with a vested interest in spreading the right wing socioeconomic agenda.. especially the economic end.

So they watch fox, they turn off fox and turn on the radio, where rush limbaugh greets them.. they spin the dial again and there's hannity, they spin it again and it's neil--"obama supporters are vapid people responsible for american idol"--boortz. They then go pick up a paper and its the wsj editorial column, etc. etc. Then the previously neutral media is contaminated by all of this because the pace of news today means at best cursory fact checking, even for major stories, allowing this complex rumor mill to foist anything short of the outright absurd into the main stream media.

Again, franken's book has several chapters on this, and from what i've witnessed it's pretty accurate