The newspaper name is followed by average daily circulation, gain/(loss), and percentage gain/(loss).
1. USA Today, McLean, Va. (M-F*) 2,280,761; 49,029; 2.2%
2. The Wall Street Journal (M-F) 2,101,017**; 280,417; 15.4%
3. The New York Times (M-F) 1,133,763; 3,023; 0.3%
4. Los Angeles Times (M-Sat*)#983,727; 4,178; 0.5%
5. The Washington Post (M-F) 772,553; (23,814); (3%)
6. Daily News, New York (M-F) 747,053; 10,023; 1.4%
7. New York Post (M-F) 678,012; 57,932; 9.3%
8. Chicago Tribune (M-F*) 614,548; (6,557);(1.1%)
9. Newsday, Melville, N.Y. (M-F) 580,346; 995; 0.2%
10. Houston Chronicle (M-Sat) 549,300; 792; 0.1%
11. The Dallas Morning News (M-F*) 529,879; (2,172); (0.4%)
12. San Francisco Chronicle (M-F) 501,135; (13,130); (2.6%)
13. Chicago Sun-Times (M-F) 486,936; (1,551); (0.3)%
14. The Arizona Republic, Phoenix (M-Sat) 466,926; (19,205); (4%)
15. The Boston Globe (M-F) 452,109; 3,334; 0.7%
16. The Star-Ledger, Newark, N.J. (M-F) 407,945; 215; 0.0%
17. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (M-F*) 401,077; (18,491); (4.4%)
18. The Philadelphia Inquirer (M-F) 387,692; 802; 0.2%
19. Star Tribune, Minneapolis (M-Sat) 377,058; 1,552; 0.4%
20. The Plain Dealer, Cleveland (M-Sat) 367,528; (5,609); (1.5%)
* Averages calculated by E&P.
** Includes 301,162 paid online subscriptions qualified under ABC rules. Online subscriptions were not counted in the year-ago figure.
# Change in publishing plan and/or frequency.
As is noted elsewhere, you can't go to a hotel in the US without having a USA Today dropped at your door, and I've noticed a lot of restaurants like McDonald's and Dennys have them for people to read around breakfast time. Their total paid circulation is probably around 50. How often do you see them at supermarket checkout stands?
The NY Times gained less than 1/2 of 1 percent, despite going national. I suspect the problem the Washington Post has is that their news people are older than the on-air talent at 60 Minutes. Also, by the time anything hits print, it's not news. I don't get the newspaper anymore because anything I would have an interest in reading is already posted on the internet, I can read it from six different viewpoints, and also read the parts the local paper cut out to save space.
As a side note, I photograph sports for a local high school and the local newspaper. I post them to my web site, also. The parents all tell me, "I saw your photos in the paper." The kids all tell me, "I saw your photos online." It's a small weekly paper, and the kids see 20 to 30 photos on Saturday morning, while their parents see 5 or 6 photos the following Thursday. Newspapers are dying. The way the country's growing, they wouldn't be fighting to hold even if the whole concept of "newspaper" wasn't becoming outdated. I think their problem is two-fold. Literacy is dropping, while people who are smart enough to read a newspaper go online. Notice the Dallas Morning News. It's in one of the fastest growing regions of the country and dropped 2,000 readers. Of course, it was once locally owned and conservative and has been bought out by a major liberal chain (I think Cox).
I also noticed the LA Times reported a readership increase, but the # indicates a change in something about the way they report, and I know they just had a bunch of layoffs because of falling revenues.
BTW, info is from editorandpublisher.com, a pretty good source for news about the news business.
Thanks for posting. Now note that two newspaper the New York Post and the WSJ made huge gains in circulation. Quick quiz: what didn't the article mention them?
It's also satisfying to note that the Arizona Republic has lost 4%. They are constantly calling me trying to give me a "free" subscription and I just laugh at them. I've told them time and time again that I wouldn't even take their liberal rag for free. Once they threw a free paper on my lawn, I called them and told them if they ever did that again I'd report them for littering.