| User | Post |
|
|
|
Exactly Paul. Local newspapers need to start focusing on finding ways to convince print readers that online is the way to go. Since they also happen to control the channel of distribution now, it shouldn't be that hard assuming they were clever enough to put out the effort.
|
|
|
10:02 am July 2, 2008
| Paul
Guest
| | | |
| |
|
|
Newspapers won't die. However your local hometown daily paper may evolve into an online only affair and contributing to a national or regional paper. Newsprint makes up nearly 25% of a paper's operating costs. Salaries are pretty much the rest. If you take the print process out of the equation and substitute for a couple web monkeys (or outsource it), you've got a lean and mean news organization.
|
|
|
9:59 am July 2, 2008
| Draco
Member
| | | |
| posts 23 |
|
|
Not to beat a dead horse but if Newspapers aren't dead, they are dying. The problem is all of the things that the article says and the fact that newspapers have always relied on a monopoly to keep them moving. Even if the Internet doesn't eventually kill them, 24 hour news will put the nail in the coffin.
I agree that a completely changed newspaper business can grow and thrive, but right now they are heading down an evolutionary dead end.
|
|
|
|
|
There is an idea floating around that newspapers are dead.What I mean by “floating around” is that just about everyone and their older brother thinks that newspapers are dead and have for years. Honestly, I have a hard time buying into that. Not because I think that any newspaper in the country is particularly innovative in their distribution models, only because I think there is (a will be for a long time) a huge number of people who don't want to receive their news online.
CNET made a few good points along these lines a little while ago, but what I thought was a lot more interesting was this post by Mark Potts which outlines a few good ways that newspapers can pull themselves out of the dregs.
Any thoughts?
|
|