Posted on 01/17/2009 8:27:08 AM PST by lainie
Papers are just really struggling. Hopefully that will lead to less liberal bias, but don't count on it.
Mine is better than many, but we still have a meeting next week to discuss the finances. Layoffs aren't coming yet, but from what I overheard the editor saying, we are cutting back wherever we can.
Needless to say, my decision to look for a higher-paying and less stressful job has been bumped up. I don't intend to be here much into the summer as much as I love journalism and feel we need some good ones out there.
It will only get worse before it gets better, and bigger papers are suffering more (already done layoffs etc.) simply because not being as local, they really are struggling more because of the decline. Until they find a way to make the Internet profitable, papers will only get worse.
Yes, online advertising has increased. But, you know what the bread and butter of a paper still is? PRINT. Online revenue just can't make up the difference right now. Frankly, I don't see it as numerically possible for online to make up the difference for a long time. Even then, that will only happen if radical changes are made.
Perhaps dailies only print a once-a-week edition and go online the rest of the time. They will probably have to be free without registration online since people won't pay or register, even if for free. If I run into any newspaper site that makes you pay to view content, I run away. I will NOT subscribe, and I am a journalist myself. If a site makes me register, I use bugmenot.com to use another person's login. Also, again.......we have the double-edged sword here. The paper's main source of revenue is PRINT. You can't take away print and expect revenue to stay the same. Thus, going online may not be a solution, but FURTHER LEAD TO DESTRUCTION.
Many will go out of business entirely. I just hope my job is safe for five months. Until yesterday's announcement of the meeting, we were all under the impression at least this paper was doing okay “enough.”
Something radical needs to be done for papers to survive. However, exactly what that is questionable. I hope this “inside” perspective gives you more insight.
Frankly, it is hard for me to envision a way that the industry will survive, for there is nothing in my mind that would stave off disaster for sure and turn things around. If anything, the most obvious cure (going online almost exclusively) could be worse than the problem.
Good news for those who want to see newspapers die.
I think they serve an important purpose, but I do hate the bias in many papers. Perhaps this will lead to change.
Oh, for those of you who say a liberal bias is the problem behind declining revenue....I write for a medium-size daily paper with a conservative/libertarian bent. It is not liberal.
I’m positively giddy in anticipation for it happening!
Definitely bad when they have front page ads. The times is really hurting. Definitely upset about them struggling.
NO LOSS. This is what happens when you print CRAP.
Gondring makes an excellent point.
Conservative papers, such as the one I write for, are hurting just as much or even worse than liberal ones.
An illiterate populace is not good for this country. The Internet is the key problem. For places starting online, it is not an issue as much. I wish I was the very rich man who thought up the Drudge Report.
But, newspapers are still mostly print, and going online won’t change that. It is likely most subscribers would just go away and the paper would die.
I meant to say I was NOT upset about the Times struggling.
They are a biased rag. I am upset about my paper and conservative ones around the country that are hurting.
But, not the Times.
Biggest, yes. Most trusted, hell no.
“including some of its biggest and most trusted names, is fighting for survival. Troubles at The New York Times, Chicago Tribune”
Now that is hilarious. Most trusted names. Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
The cash flow situation for the NY Times is terminal.
They borrowed all that money to fund the family dividends.
And now that they really need the money, it’s already been borrowed and spent.
The inbred rats at the NY Times are going to have to cut 1 out of 2 staffers in the next few months and it’s going to be hilarious to see who gets the boot.
Seriously though, even conservative papers may go under here. It's not good for a country to have uninformed rubes.
I am sure buyout deals will be coming shortly before outright layoffs ensue with a paper that in bad a situation.
Who is going to buy them?
Media company stock prices have collapsed (including News Corp.) so a stock swap deal isn’t likely.
Debt financing isn’t likely because the NY Times doesn’t have the cash flow to support the additional debt. And who would lend money to an outside firm looking to acquire them? The investor money isn’t there.
The can’t find anyone to buy the Boston Globe, About.com or their New England sports properties.
They’re trying to do a sale-leaseback of their headquarters, but given the Manhattan office marketplace right now, they’re going to get screwed big-time in the deal.
Bottom line, they only way they can make themselves at least semi-attractive to a buyer is to cut costs by 50% and demonstrate that the business can be run with half the current staff.
Thank you for your thoughtful post.
Our print newspapers have historically done the expensive investigative reporting that has been so important in uncovering fraud and abuse in our nation.
Who and what will take its place?
Surely there will still be a market for this type of investigative reporting.
The challenge we face as conservative activists and writers is to figure out how to condense information about government sloth and corruption into a format that can compete with mindless entertainment. I think the audience is now receptive because they have now been made aware that the wages of sloth are the current political and economic mess. Now we have to figure out how to turn the Chris Dodd-style corruption into entertainment.
Yes. We have the tools and the means to distribute it.
It has to be condensed and packaged in the form of entertainment. That is the challenge.
Years ago, there was this commercial for FedEx or UPS or something. It showed a postal worker, aged and senile, surrounded by cobwebs at his window. The theme was the USPS was slow and outdated, and the shipper shouldn’t use them.
Devastatingly effective. The postal union went apesh!t.
And also, there was this Reagan commercial back in the 80’s done by Ailes, IIRC. Showed this Tip O’Neal character (obese, white headed) at the wheel of a big car wandering all over the road, blissful of where the American people wanted to go.
The New York Times Company to Webcast Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year 2008 Earnings Conference Call
NEW YORK, Jan 07, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) — The New York Times Company announced today that its fourth-quarter and full-year 2008 earnings conference call will be held on Wednesday, January 28, at 11:00 a.m. E.T. The Company’s earnings announcement will be released before the market opens that morning and will be available on www.nytco.com.
To access the call, dial 877-852-6573 (in the U.S.) and 719-325-4798 (international callers). Participants should dial into the conference call approximately 10 minutes before the start time. Online listeners can link to the live webcast at www.nytco.com/investors.
An archive of the webcast will be available beginning about two hours after the call at www.nytco.com/investors, and a transcript of the call will also be posted. The archive and transcript will be available for one quarter.
An audio replay will be available at 888-203-1112 (in the U.S.) and 719-457-0820 (international callers) beginning approximately two hours after the call until 5 p.m. E.T. on Friday, January 30. The access code is 8119643.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.