Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Viking on March 16, 2014, 05:03:46 PM
-
I'm reading a rather interesting discussion on a Swedish forum about the (predicted) coming death of printed news media. Things aren't looking good for them, something that the people discussing it have no qualms gloating about. How is American printed media doing? Have they reached a level where they can trudge along, neither losing or gaining more readers, or are they also circling the drain?
Edit: if they are dying, what are your opinions about this? Good riddance, or sadly missed?
-
Is the decline in pet birds due to the decline in newspapers, or vice versa? Big vote here for the former, not the latter.
Print newspapers are not printing "news" any more. The intrawebz has pretty much seen to that. And some of those still hanging on are purposely pounding the fingertips they are holding on by with immense sledgehammers via their editorial stances - liberal BS only entices even the committed Obamanaut for so long.
INHO many of the other "traditional" news outlets are not that far behind. TV can only cram so much PC-passed video into a 30-miute time slot that must also include advertising, sports, and at least 3 attempts at prognosticating the weather along with making the "news team" look like a bunch of friends having a wonderful time standing around together taking turns speaking at the viewers while performing poorly-scripted comedy routines.
Call them blogs, boards, aggregators or somethging else but there are folks out there (both commercial and truely independent) posting real, happening-now news. Some are found by search engine searching, some are found by surfing and rabbit-holing, and quite a lot are found by referral (whsat web sites do you get your news from?).
At least that's what I read in today's fishwrapper.
stay safe.
PS _ when the dead-tree form of newspaper finally dies, our beloved c&sd will need to find another way to annoy his kids.
-
Is the decline in pet birds due to the decline in newspapers, or vice versa? Big vote here for the former, not the latter.
Print newspapers are not printing "news" any more. The intrawebz has pretty much seen to that. And some of those still hanging on are purposely pounding the fingertips they are holding on by with immense sledgehammers via their editorial stances - liberal BS only entices even the committed Obamanaut for so long.
INHO many of the other "traditional" news outlets are not that far behind. TV can only cram so much PC-passed video into a 30-miute time slot that must also include advertising, sports, and at least 3 attempts at prognosticating the weather along with making the "news team" look like a bunch of friends having a wonderful time standing around together taking turns speaking at the viewers while performing poorly-scripted comedy routines.
Call them blogs, boards, aggregators or somethging else but there are folks out there (both commercial and truely independent) posting real, happening-now news. Some are found by search engine searching, some are found by surfing and rabbit-holing, and quite a lot are found by referral (whsat web sites do you get your news from?).
At least that's what I read in today's fishwrapper.
stay safe.
PS _ when the dead-tree form of newspaper finally dies, our beloved c&sd will need to find another way to annoy his kids.
warren buffet just bought 60 small papers only closed one
-
If they weren't all a bunch a liberal, leftist trash, I might feel a little more remorse.
-
The major newspapers have pretty much dropped all pretense of not being leftist agitprop.
As for actual reporting of news, they are typically way behind talk radio, bloggers, and various internet news services. Really, if the newspapers died, the only people who would miss them are paper companies and fishermen.
-
I don't know about an exact comparison to Sweden, but we've heard a lot about U.S. newspapers dying. Were I to actually read a print newspaper, I imagine it would be half-full of articles about the death of the dead-tree newspaper business.
-
The major newspapers have pretty much dropped all pretense of not being leftist agitprop.
As for actual reporting of news, they are typically way behind talk radio, bloggers, and various internet news services. Really, if the newspapers died, the only people who would miss them are paper companies and fishermen.
Seems awfully familiar.
-
major papers are going down. small papers not so much
-
Even the small papers are dying a slow death.
The local weekly rag is lucky to have 6 pages these days. The three daily rags in the area are slipping down the tubes a little at a time. Advertising is drying up in favor of on line ads.
The wife worked for all three of the local dailies (2 of them are the same parent company) and she keeps in touch with folks still there. Part of the problem is the steady increase in online news and part (for the local rags anyway) is the incompetence of the staff. When she finally bailed on the last place she worked they last close to 20% of their in town advertisers within 3 weeks of her leaving becasue the ad sales people couldn't deliver the product they had been getting.
I can get AP stories anywhere. When I buy a local newspaper I want local news.
-
the local here trimmed staff by 33% and still shows a profit and its local news that does it. ironically some of their best left and went to local online stuff. they get clobbered by guys they got rid off
-
The big papers have studiously pissed off and run off over half their potential readers with their leftist propaganda. Many of those not run off increasingly get their news online. Craigslist has cut a bloody, gaping hole in their revenue. So the big papers have been cutting personnel like mad. If not circling the drain, they have been holed below the water line and are listing heavily to port.
OTOH, the FREE alternative weekly, that has similar amount of LOCAL content, is doing OK.
-
I think my parents are the only ones on their street that still get the paper. When I was growing up every house got either The Star (morning) or News (Afternoon) Both were Conservative as in "Reagan: not want we really want, but he'll have to do." The family that had owned it for a hundred years or so, sold it to Gannett and they became more leftwing agitprop. The only reason they get it is because it keeps my mother occupied for about an hour (she reads it from cover to cover, concentrating on the obits), thereby giving my dad a break. Without that, it would have been cancelled quite a while ago.
Their circulation was over 240,000 in 2008 and barely above 156,000 in 2013.
As the snow has melted I found a 3 Jan copy of the local weekly fishwrap sitting on top of the remains of a snow pile at the end of the driveway. Haven't gotten any since then.
-
I forgot to mention that I no longer buy a copy of my hometown weekly. The week before Oklahoma's open carry law went into effect the owner editor ran a op-ed against open carry and carry in general. Making a point of telling people that carry guns that they were not welcome in her establishment and informing local businesses that they could purchase from her the no guns allowed sign just like she posted. Now I believe she has the absolute right to her position and opinion but I also h have an absolute right to not support her.
I doubt that the loss of my $0.75 a week had any noticeable impact on her bottom line I also doubt I'm the only one in the community that feels that way.
-
The two Milwaukee papers merged, and their circulation is dropping.
The desperation is thick. The past few years, the number of "shopper" papers that show up for free in the mailbox with all the paper's advertising has increased. They've also put up a half-assed paywall, to see if they can get subscription money from people unwilling to simply clear the paper's cookies from their browser, but they're also clearly afraid a full paywall will reduce the site's traffics and ad click-thru and impression rates to near zero.
So here it's: "Dying, but not fast enough to suit me".
-
They are not doing well.
In fact the only reason they are lasting this long IMHO is because of the old pharts who prefer a printed paper because it's what they have gotten their entire lives. Online and TV news is much quicker to update (since you don't have to wait a whole day to get the news of what happened on a given day) and you can find out what is happening across the country, especially stuff that would not normally be printed in a national paper.
One thing that does work in newspaper's favor is that most of them have set up websites so even after the print edition they will still exist. At least they are smart enough to do that.
Interestingly enough, I'm seeing some new online only papers pop up. The one that popped up in my hometown about 8 years or so ago is kicking the traditional paper's ass because they have current news, stories that actually interest local readers, and easy links to community information and such so it's actually USEFUL. It's not the greatest website but it's simple and usable, and it's free- the paper is funded by advertisements on the sidebars but no popups.
-
Our local paper had no debt and was profitable. But they got rid of most of their employees across the entire spectrum, especially reporters. They do a Sunday home delivery and a Monday, Wednesday and Friday home delivery. You can subscribe to a daily internet paper. If you subscribe to the internet and get the limited home delivery, the cost is about the same as before.
I peddled that paper as a kid in the early 50's. I cancelled my subscription and just check in daily for there rather limited free online headline local stuff. I go out on Sunday mornings to pick up that addition for something to do before having breakfast and to support the small business that has the paper for sale.
-
I get a small free local on my doorstep irregularly, which I would chuck. About a year ago I actually looked it over and was delighted to find honest to G-d good reporting in it. Just who, what, why, where, when, and how. It was so unlike what I had seen in the dailies (and which I had canceled) that I now read it completely when I see it by my door.
Refreshing, but it's probably on its way out. I should call them and see if they've gone online yet.
-
The only thing I miss about not getting the weekly local paper tossed into my driveway for free is that I have find other stuff to start a fire in the fireplace.
-
I can get AP stories anywhere. When I buy a local newspaper I want local news.
It blows my mind that most of these news companies STILL don't get this.
Its my understanding that the backbone of traditional paper was advertising and sports. Sports brought the eyes, adverts brought the money. Both of these are now more effective online. The business model no longer works, and I have yet to see a new model that is an effective replacement. The only news I pay for is WSJ. The rest is instapundit and google when I have time.
I bet Facebook could take over local news if they were clever about collating people's posts.
-
Thread necromancy!
Swedish newspaper Metro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_International) (freesheet) announced that they're firing about 2/3s of their remaining staff, including all journalists, editors and such for the dead tree version. The journalisticing and editing will be contracted out to TT. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidningarnas_Telegrambyr%C3%A5) This'll be interesting. I think the end might be near for this paper.
-
^ You mean all those journalists will have to look for real work and encounter reality?
Pity.
-
^ You mean all those journalists will have to look for real work and encounter reality?
Pity.
Yup. Because from everything I've read there's a whole lot of firing going on, and just about no hiring.
-
The only thing that I will miss when the Press finally dies are the ads.
It's awfully convenient to go shopping thru the ads whilst attending to other business.
That and I'll need other material to start the charcoal with.
A friends' husband delivers the Press.According to her I'm still supposed to be getting a free supplement(ads and gossip)every Saturday.I received three in 2013(kept track on purpose).I contacted the Press just to let them know that their delivery people weren't.Never heard back from them.Tells me enough right there.
-
3/52=6%
About on a par with the general press's Accuracy Quotient. >:D
I had my suspicions a long time ago (ca. 1970) when I started listening to short wave radio newscasts by various nations. Sure, they had their own slants on "what happened" in the world, but when I read about it in the U.S. Newspapers it was like it happened on a different planet.
"With freedom comes responsibility." Hey, journalists, that applies to First Amendment Freedoms, too.
Maybe we ought to get you guys licensed and registered.
-
...
Maybe we ought to get you guys licensed and registered.
It's cheaper to license/register them if they are neutered.
stay safe.
-
That and I'll need other material to start the charcoal with.
No problem with that around here. I live in a semi-rural, semi-'burb town with a population of less than 10,000 people and I receive THREE (unwanted) free, local newspapers. Don't even read 'em -- they never actually report any news, so they go straight from the mail box to the recycling bin.
-
It's cheaper to license/register them if they are neutered.
stay safe.
Yeah bt they're almost impossible to paper train.