Can Print Be The Next Vinyl?

from the it-would-take-work dept

One of the more interesting trends in the music world is the “return” of the vinyl LP. While sales of CD’s continue to fall in the face of digital downloads, vinyl LP sales continue to rise:

Consumers purchased 1.88 million new vinyl LPs in 2008, an 89 percent increase over 2007 and the highest sales volume recorded in the 17-year history of Nielsen SoundScan. Further, in good news for some physical retailers, two out of three vinyls LPs were purchased at independent record stores.

There are a number of reasons for this, but the most obvious is that the LP is a tangible object that can’t be easily reproduced and can only be shared through a physical, real-world exchange. For true fans, the LP is a sort of badge of fandom, proof of just how much you love the band. Compared to a digital download or a CD, the LP is a crafted thing, complete with large-scale artwork and often other inserts.

While it isn’t likely that LP sales will eclipse digital downloads anytime soon, it is also highly unlikely that the LP market will be undercut by piracy.

Could these same factors be a forecaster for the future of printed books and newspapers? It is hard to imagine that these items, so easily digitized, will be able to maintain their current position on top of the mountain and we are already seeing the rapid decline of the newspaper business.

In the cases of both newspapers and books, it might be that their only hope in surviving over the long-term is to invest in elements that can truly not be pirated. As Dave Eggers points out in a recent Salon interview:

I think newspapers shouldn’t try to compete directly with the Web, and should do what they can do better, which may be long-form journalism and using photos and art, and making connections with large-form graphics and really enhancing the tactile experience of paper. You know, including a full-color comic section, for example, which of course was standard in newspapers years ago, when you’d have a full broadsheet Winsor McCay comic. So we’ll have a big, full-color comic section, and we’re also trying to emphasize what younger readers are looking for, what directly appeals to them.

Now, I am not saying that comics section will save newspapers, but the point is to make the object something desirable to possess in physical form.

For the moment, we are going to see traditional publishers fight futilely to maintain the status quo but the ground is quickly falling away beneath them and it is going to take some innovative thinking about the value of printed matter to keep them in the game.

Crossposted from My Media Musings

David Title is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from David Title and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

30 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Online Journalism vs. Print Journalism: Real Time vs. Batch Processing

from the think-about-it dept

Last week, there was a bit of a silly fight over the NY Times publishing an article noting that blogs sometimes publish rumors. I didn't find the story to be all that bad, actually, as it did a fair job explaining why those blogs publish rumors without confirmation, and how they do it in a reasonable way (i.e., saying it's a rumor and hasn't been confirmed). Some felt the article was a hit piece, but on the whole it actually seemed pretty reasonable and accurate. Still, in response to that, Cody Brown (via Jay Rosen) put up a fascinating and thought-provoking writeup comparing online to print journalism -- noting that print is "batch processing" while online is "real-time processing" and explaining why this makes it so difficult for print to either understand the value of online journalism, or to keep up with it. To be honest, I think the point was made even clearer in last week's hilarious Daily Show takedown of the NY Times, where Jason Jones refers to the newspaper as "aged news" and asks Rick Berke, the assistant managing editor to point out a single article in today's newspaper that "happened today" (at around 3 minutes):

Separately, I should point out that I find it amusing that around 1:45, the video quotes Kristin Mason, the NYT's communications coordinator, noting that "The NY Times really prides itself on making sure that the information we're putting out in the newspaper and online is factual. We have editors going through and checking on a variety of sources...."

Fair enough... But what happened on Friday? That's when the NY Times falsely reported that The Pirate Bay had lost its appeal... and that false story has remained uncorrected at least up until I published this story. It appears that the "pride" the NY Times takes in getting the story right doesn't necessarily extend to things like The Pirate Bay.

12 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Newspaper Association Kills Off Print Magazine -- Goes Online Only

from the that-seems-ironic... dept

The Newspaper Association of America, who just recently has been out pushing the value of a print product as opposed to an online-only product, seems to not be taking its own advice. According to Romenesko, the NAA has not only laid off nearly 50% of its staff, but it's also switching its own print magazine to an online-only production. Seems difficult to take the group seriously when it claims print is somehow fundamentally a better product, doesn't it?

5 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Is There Something Fundamentally Better About 'Print' Than 'Online'?

from the please-explain dept

Via Jay Rosen comes a discussion sponsored by the Newspaper Association of America about how to "reinvent" the print newspaper. Of course, it seems like the premise here is a bit skewed. It's like saying "how to reinvent the horse-drawn carriage" rather than "how do we improve transportation." There's no rule that news has to come in print form, but it seems like some newspaper folks believe that print has special powers. As Rosen highlights, Charlotte Hall, an editor from the Orlando Sentinel, says during the discussion:

It stops the clock once a day and takes an assessment, offering the kind of in-depth and analytical work that the 24/7 breaking news world on the Web cannot provide. Print is good at the things the Web is not good at--watchdog, explanatory, enterprise, narrative storytelling.

That sounds good, but it's not print that's doing that. It's the reporters and editors who are doing that -- and there's absolutely nothing stopping them from doing it online as well. And, therein lies the problem. Some folks in the newspaper world seem to have imbued "print" with special powers that it just doesn't have. Yes, for many people print newspapers are convenient -- and they don't necessarily need to go away. But it seems that so many people get so focused on the physical paper that they forget about actually serving their community.

35 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Will Newspapers Start Selling Special Printers Now?

from the desperation-sets-in dept

Reader Cannen alerts us to the fact that MediaNews wants to experiment with the idea of letting people create custom newspapers and print them out at home via a special printer. The idea is interesting at a first pass, but the more you think about it, the less it makes sense. Who wants to get a special printer just to print out their newspaper? If they really wanted to offer this, what's wrong with letting people use the printers they already have? Or are these newspapers hoping to make more money by selling printers? Perhaps they're jealous of the ridiculous margins found in printer ink these days -- and they're hoping to cash in on selling special ink that you can only buy from them to print your paper. While I'm sure there are some people who might like this option, just so they can still read their news on paper each day, it seems like a pretty narrow market.

10 Comments | Leave a Comment..

What Does It Mean For The Christian Science Monitor To Go Web Only?

from the questions,-questions,-questions dept

Early Tuesday, I saw the news that the venerable Christian Science Monitor newspaper was the first major mainstream daily newspaper to decide to shift away from print and focus mainly on the web. For the last few years there's been plenty of talk about how this day would come eventually, but it's still quite a surprise to see it actually happen. While I think it's the right move, I had expected most major newspapers to hang on until the bitter end. I didn't have a chance to write up a post on it immediately, so it gave me more of a chance to think through what this really means. The cost of producing, printing and distributing a physical newspaper each day is quite high. So, removing all of those costs is a big deal. The paper still is planning to do a print version weekly, which will function more as a weekly magazine, allowing the staff to dig deeper into various issues and provide a more complete summary reading for the week. Thus it will still need to do some printing and distribution, but at a vastly reduced rate and scale.

In a lot of ways, this setup probably makes a lot more sense for many people. Newspapers have long since lost their ability to be the source of "breaking news" in print. News breaks online, and by the time it's in the newspaper the next morning, it's old hat. The days of paperboys screaming "Extra! Extra!" are long gone. Still, many may question the timing of the move. Online advertising, while growing rapidly for many, still doesn't make up a huge percentage of revenue for most newspapers. Decreasing the costs significantly means that the revenue doesn't have to match, but there may still be quite a gap there, and I'd imagine some may have been more comfortable waiting for the gap to close before leaping out of the plane without much of a parachute.

However, in taking that plunge, it will force the CSMonitor to really focus in on making its website as good as it can be, both for readers and for advertisers. That sort of hyperfocus could be quite useful, as we've seen too many newspapers find themselves in a struggle for resources and attention between the (dwindling) cash cow print business, and the small, but growing, online markets. No matter what, you can bet that other big (and small) newspapers will be watching the CSM's leap with great interest as they plan their own strategies for a changing media world.

12 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Philadelphia Inquirer Tells Staff Bloggers Not To Use Blogs To Test Story Ideas

from the artificial-scarcity... dept

When you've built a business based on artificial scarcity for years, and then suddenly find yourself in a much more competitive market, it's no surprise that some of the ideas you come up with will be to run directly towards more artificial scarcity. That's what the Philadelphia Inquirer appears to be doing with its new policy to not put many types of stories online until they hit the physical paper. This doesn't apply to breaking news (thank goodness), but pretty much everything else: "investigative reporting, enterprise, trend stories, news features, and reviews of all sorts." You can sort of understand why the paper would like to coordinate, though it does seem to treat online as a second class citizen. It also leads to one odd and highly questionable decision:

For our bloggers, especially, this may require a bit of an adjustment. Some of you like to try out ideas that end up as subjects of stories or columns in print first.

Apparently, that's no longer allowed. Of course, for columnists, that's one of the main advantages of having a blog. It lets you try out ideas, get feedback, and generally make the final product that much better. But apparently the Philadelphia Inquirer would rather come out with a lower quality product -- as long as it all comes out at the same time.

8 Comments | Leave a Comment..

LA Times Just Realized That Print And Online Newsrooms Should Be The Same?

from the a-bit-slow-on-the-uptake,-huh? dept

Nearly three years ago, we were surprised to hear the NY Times proudly announce that it was going to merge its online and offline newsrooms. What we couldn't believe was that in 2005 a newspaper actually still had thought it made sense to treat the two separately. However, apparently the Times was way ahead of some other newspapers. Buried in the ho-hum news about massive LA Times layoffs is the news that, as part of this reorganization, it's finally going to merge its web and print operations as well. When you're sitting around wondering where newspapers went wrong, the fact that they wanted to keep web and print operations separate is probably a good place to start.

10 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Can A Newspaper Survive By Only Printing Twice A Week?

from the what's-the-goal-here? dept

Romenesko points out that the Madison Capital Times, in Wisconsin, is not just putting more emphasis on its internet operations, but it's also cutting back on the print paper to the point of only coming out with a printed paper twice a week. Reader Joel also sent this in, saying: "A newspaper's web site gets its credibility from the daily publication. Without that it's just another news web site, and anyone can put up a web site. I think they need a reputable daily publication, even if it sells poorly and loses a little money, to give the web site legitimacy." I mostly agree, though, if you can successfully do news just online, paper could be a pretty big waste. However, in this case, it's unclear what benefit the "twice-a-week" strategy really provides. It will probably upset those who really liked reading the physical paper each day, and will do little to attract new readership. If they wanted to really bet on the web, why not make the bet complete? Going halfway by making the paper version less valuable doesn't seem all that compelling.

9 Comments | Leave a Comment..