RSS
Will The NY Times Still Have A Print Edition In Five Years?
from the history-repeating dept
Looking ahead, there's little doubt that newspapers face rather uncertain future. The painful changes brought on by the internet have been exacerbated by some really foolish decisions on the part of the industry. Of all of the newspapers, perhaps none has been more visible in its struggles than the New York Times. Not only is the company doing poorly from a financial standpoint, but its strategy of locking up its best content behind a paywall has proven to be a disappointment. At the recent World Economic Forum, the company's publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, sat down for an interview with Israeli newspaper Haaretz, during which he discusses, with surprising candor, the future of the paper (via Threadwatch). On the surface, it sounds like Sulzberger is prepared to do what it takes to embrace the internet. He said that he doesn't know or care whether the company will still be publishing a print edition in five years, but that the company's current mission won't be complete until the last print edition is printed. He also recognizes that newspapers should be able to benefit from the economics of the internet, noting how little it costs to publish online, compared to print. But at the same time, it sounds like Sulzberger is still basically a believer in the TimesSelect model, as he insisted that in the future all readers will have to pay to read the Times online. As for why readers would opt to pay to read the Times, when there are so many sources of news out there, he said the paper can be a trusted "curator" of the news. Ultimately, the impression one gets from reading the interview is that the Times is happy to embrace the internet, so long as it's on its own terms, and the core business model remains the same. It still wants to get paid the same way, and it hopes that its 155 years of history as the paper of record will allow it remain a trusted source of news. Cast in this light, the rhetoric about one day abandoning the print edition doesn't really sound so radical.
I’m looking for research...
Apps, Platforms, Consumer Use
The Growing App Market
I’m looking for policy...
Jon Potter: Software Patent Trolls Can Be Stopped By U.S. Patent Office And Congress
Developers On Patents: Five Employees, Six Lawyers
I have an app...
App Developer Conversations: What Does The iPad Mini Mean For The App Economy?
Top 5 Reasons Why Mobile Analytics Is Important
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
"Trusted" source of news?
"Trusted"? Feh!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Any organization that has good writers will be able to charge people for the content. People will pay becaue the "many new sources of news" that is out there is typically bullshit.
The creators of EPIC may have had it right, in the future, all news will be personalized, tailored to individuals regardless of facts and superficial.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Micropayments
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Content We Want
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
EPIC link
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Although, by and large most of the 'useful' news I get is off the web.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
It's political spin
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Bird cage liners
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Paper based news is portable, does not require batteries, internet or any thechnology. People are used to buy it from the newsstand, or find it on their front door in the morning.
Forcing your existing readership off the paper and to the web may cause the forementioned readership to wonder "Gee, there's already too much free info on the web, why pay for the narrow view of the NYT?"
And everyone hops to news.google.com and NYT files for chap 7.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
AP, Dow Jones? All of these feeds charge money.
People work for newspapers and good publications because they are good writers and they expect to be paid for their talent.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I can't believe how myopic you folks can be...
I think sometimes techDirt forgets the fact that humans functioned long before the internet and the internet will become like every other technology, molded to the wants of those in power, and that's not the average user. The internet will become a casualty of its own success, as we are already starting to see. As more and more people use it, it will become more and more regulated, which means that those who shape and control lawmaking have the power. History has shown this time and time again. I'm not saying this is what I want, I just prefer to be a realist about such things.
As it was already pointed out, even the much loved Google news service is basically an aggregate of a bunch of other news services. If you want my prediction for the future, once these companies start seeing their profit margins shrink and realize that online ads won't pay the bills in a saturated marketspace, they will take steps to lock things down even more (sorry, don't think they will "innovate" as we like to throw the word around so much) and the only recourse we will have is to boo-hoo about how wrong they are and how they are doomed.
So let's not confuse naive wishful thinking with the reality of the world. Until serious reporters move to exclusively online venues (and not these quasi-serious bloggers who put themselves out as writers but the minute they are called on their crap hide behind the "we are just blogging" garbage), I'll keep my subscription to the times.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
3 versions
The Times should do three versions,
a print one (that costs the most),
a pdf version (same as the print edition but a lot cheaper) which is scalable for smaller screens blackberry, palm, etc. but still works on normal screens,
And a free online version thats totally supported by ads.
Im a jourlanism student, and my professors insist that we all read the Times every day. I dont get it delivered b/c it just gets stolen from my lobby, but i dont like the feel of clicking through links to browse.
I would be willing to pay for a PDF version so i could read it on my tablet on the subway and not have to accidentally smack other passengers when I turn the page.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
HAHAHA
I guess you people dont have anything else to do.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment