TheGraphicOnline

I have some other things to talk about, but I can’t seem to get away from the rapidly unfolding drama of the “Newspaper Dilemma.” How about taking up some comments, mostly from local bloggers and a few from others.

They have all been good lately, the most arresting being a challenge to my opinions on the basis of “Content.” Good content is highly important, as John Morton, the industry’s premier analyst (whom I’ll re-visit later), has been arguing for years. His advice to the Moguls of Newspaperdom has been: Don’t cut content or you devalue your core value, which is providing local news. Or, stated another way: “Don’t mortgage your future by grabbing short-term profits.” But that’s the way public companies, sensitive to quarterly profit, operate.

Now, let’s look at the role of Content in the present situation. Commentators on this blog (EdShoebridge and Ronald 1) place the decline in content at the top of the list. Beefeater seems to agree and adds some interesting personal experiences, citing his publication of The Newport News and Bob Hansen’s Main Event – both fine papers. But I have to observe (sorry) that neither paper lasted very long, did they? We have to deal with critical factors, not with how “nice it would be to have another newspaper.” The crucial factor is to find a source of revenue sufficient to support the business. If you will excuse a personal reference, when I started our little paper, then the West Side Enterprise, all I heard was, “What this town needs is another newspaper” and “Sure, we’ll support you.” After starting it, all (or almost all) I heard was, “Not now. Come back next week.” (I won’t elaborate on what happened next; I don’t want you to cry.)

So, on the subject of good content, yes, that’s important, but yo can supply only so much content with so much revenue. The critical element is finding a revenue source that will support the enterprise. O.K., some say that better content will create that revenue. I have to reply, respectfully, that No, that’s not the crucial problem right now with daily newspapers. They still have pretty good content but they have been giving it away. Somehow, that’s got to stop. Somehow, they have to find a way to charge for that content and IF they still hope to preserve a printed newspaper, that revenue has to support the newspaper, not just the web site (although some people say, “Forget the newspaper, just go web site.”)

I promised you a bit of the wisdom emanating from John Morton, unquestionably the most respected analyst in the industry. In the current issue of the American Journalism Review, his regular column includes these preparatory remarks (which I’ll repeat so we’ll all know we’re on the same wave length). He states:

The rationale behind free access is that it’s the only way to attract enough traffic to bring in Internet advertising. That approach developed after early attempts to charge for content met with disappointing results. But even with free content, newspapers have had only modest success in garnering Internet advertising; last year it amounted to about 8 percent of their total ad revenue.

Skipping over other background description, he concludes:

I call on all you publishers to decide…to charge for Internet access to your newspaper content: Offer your readers the choice of getting their paper online, with the advantages of expanded information and search capabilities, or in print for the same price. A modest premium would give them both.

That’s pretty close to what we’ve been talking about here, don’t you think, including the plan put forth by blogger tac1453?

Some further refinements in this approach are worth examining, but those will have to wait until next time.

Do you think we’re on the right track?

–Vic Jose

Vic Jose :: Apr.18.2009 :: Uncategorized ::

Trackback URI | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed