Does The Wall Street Journal Risk Becoming Irrelevant?
from the learn-to-play-online dept
Last year, Adam Penenberg knocked the NY Times for becoming increasingly irrelevant in an online world. By locking up their archives, they made it difficult to be found in Google -- and in an online world, if you're not found on Google, you barely exist. If that was bad, things may be much worse for the Wall Street Journal, according to Penenberg. We've covered this issue before. Many people are giving up on the Wall Street Journal, in part because they can't link to the stories. In an online world where many people feel that sharing the news is as important (if not more important) than reading it, this makes the Wall Street Journal useless. While the Journal has been able to coast by on its (well deserved) reputation, Penenberg points out that the younger generation that's being raised online has other options. The Wall Street Journal's strategy works in a world where there aren't other options, and everyone learns that to get the day's business news you go to the WSJ. It's a strategy for the status quo. However, it's not a strategy for bringing on new readers when those new readers are already overwhelmed by news everywhere they look. So, while the WSJ's strategy may be able to last for some time, it's going to increasingly come under pressure -- which is why Penenberg suggests they throw up the doors now. Of course, it's unlikely the Journal will listen. Instead, they're trying to do things like start a weekend paper edition -- because what we all want in our lives these days is more paper.