Posted on 07/28/2010 10:14:50 AM PDT by abb
Newspapers continue to be seen as less important at their primary job -- being sources of information – according to the latest edition of the nine-year-old Digital Future Project from the USC Annenberg School for Communications and Journalism.
The study found that just 56% Internet users ranked newspapers as important or very important sources of information for them, down from 60% in 2008 -- and below the Internet (78%) and television (68%).
And while newspapers also regard themselves as being in the entertainment business, just 29% of users consider them as important sources of entertainment, down from 32% two years ago, and last among principal media.
The University of Southern California study, which has tracked a representative sample of Internet users and nonusers over nine years, found that this year 18% of Internet users said they stopped a subscription to a newspaper or magazine because they now get the same or related content online. The study notes that down from 22% who said that in 2008, “but nevertheless a strong indication that print newspapers can be sacrificed by a significant percentage of Internet users.”
If their newspaper dropped its print edition, Internet users say, 59% said they would read the online edition of the publication while just 37% said they would start reading another print newspaper.
More than a fifth of respondents said they would not miss the printed newspaper.
"The downward spiral in print newspaper circulation no doubt will be accelerated by advances in online delivery of news content through e-readers or other handheld electronic devices," Jeffrey I. Cole, director of the school’s Center for the Digital Future, said in a statement. "After years of aborted attempts, these advances finally appear to be practical and affordable methods of providing electronic news content to readers. If so, what will that mean for the future of the traditional print newspaper?"
If Internet users are increasingly indifferent to newspapers, they maintain a love/hate relationship with the Internet. Mistrust of the Web is growing, according to this latest study.
Some 61% of Internet users said that only half or less of online information is reliable, which the project said was a new low.
“Even more disturbing is that 14% of Internet users said that only a small portion or none of the information online is reliable – a percentage that has grown for the past three years and is now at the highest level thus far in the Digital Future Project,” the study said.
Users are increasingly skeptical even of well-established search engines such as Google and Yahoo. Back in 2006, 64% users told the study they believe that most or all of the information provided by search engines was reliable and accurate. The current percentage if 56%.
The study also found it’s not just newspapers that face online pay problems. Half of Internet users reported they have used microblogs such as Twitter. But when asked if they would pay for Twitter, nobody said they would.
"Such an extreme finding that produced a zero response underscores the difficulty of getting Internet users to pay for anything that they already receive for free," Cole said. "Twitter has no plans to charge its users, but this result illustrates, beyond any doubt, the tremendous problem of transforming free users into paying users."
Fully 70% of Internet users said they find online advertising “annoying,” and half said they never click on Web advertising.
But more than half, 55%, said they would rather put up with Web advertising than pay for content. Mark Fitzgerald is editor of E&P. (mfitzgerald@editorandpublisher.com)
ping
http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=2724
The Platform: What Is Happening at The Washington Post
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-onthemedia-20100728,0,304838.column
On the Media: Let’s put more public documents online
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-07-28/sumner-redstone-hires-another-friend-rohini-singh/
New Sumner Girl on Payroll
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/07/cnns-ratings-woes-not-limited-to-campbell-brown-and-larry-king.html
CNN’s ratings woes not limited to Campbell Brown and Larry King
http://gigaom.com/2010/07/27/newspapers-hit-new-low-as-an-information-source/
Newspapers Hit New Low as an Information Source
Newspapers? News. Papers. What is this “newspapers” about which is written? The word sounds faintly familiar but I get nothing but a bad feeling. An almost hostile feeling. Hmmm...
Oh well, back to Breitbart’s Bigs, Drudge and this cozy place.
Truth be told, except for an ocassional IBD, I haven’t actually bought a newspaper in something like 20 + years. Why buy them? They are usually at least a day late and dollar short regarding news. Further, when traveling, newspapers are just lying around. It amazes me that they are still in business.
Re CNN @ 7:00
“Now, though, CNN has dropped to fourth in that hour.”
Fourth?
Fox, MSNBC, ? , CNN
Who is ?
Headline News (HLN)
http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/cable-news
Cable News Ratings for Monday, July 26, 2010
P2+ Prime Time
FNC – 2,221,000 viewers
CNN – 458,000 viewers
MSNBC –778,000 viewers
CNBC – 299,000 viewers
HLN – 525,000 viewers
Notice that Fox has more than all the rest put together.
My folks have been subscribers of the LA Times for at least 40 years. They grew up in another age.
Has anyone here seen that rag lately. They’ve switched to using a format that is much more narrow than it used to be, probably about 2/3rds to 3/4ths of the normal page width.
It looks more like a cheap tract now, rather than a well respected source of news.
What a hoot, seeing the propagandists wither on the vine.
I was just going to point that out. Interesting isn’t it.
No wonder the Left can’t resist trying to destroy FoxNews.
I tell them that I would not want it if they delivered it for free. The value of the content is less than the effort to recycle it.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
FYI..Just finished Kindred’s book..a good read, and he is definitely NOT optimistic on the long tern viability of the WaPo.....
I have that on my Amazon list along with the new bio of Pulitzer.
With print circulation falling by 8.7% this year, how long will it be before the newspaper’s print advertisers demand an 8.7% reduction in ad rates and thus cut even more into newspaper revenues?
Will the advertisers wait until the next report from the Audit Bureau or are they already demanding ad rate reductions??
With print circulation falling by 8.7% this year, how long will it be before the newspaper’s print advertisers demand an 8.7% reduction in ad rates and thus cut even more into newspaper revenues?
Will the advertisers wait until the next report from the Audit Bureau or are they already demanding ad rate reductions??
At one of the local parish (county) meetings that I attend while reporting for my online newsblog, I have overheard chatter from other reporters that the local Gannett newspaper offers advertisers discounts up front. The advertisers don’t even have to ask.
One reporter works for the area Gannett paper. The other works for the local weekly. The reporter for the weekly tells me the Gannett paper (Monroe, LA News-Star) calls up their customers and offers two for one specials when they can’t fill up their ad pages.
This has been going on for over six months.
Thanks.
Speaking for myself, even if I were a liberal running an ad agency I doubt I would even bother paying for discount ads in major papers like the Times and the Post because circulation is falling so rapidly that the ads wouldn’t reach as large an audience as I could reach with radio and TV and certain very large websites.
I could probably get more advertising bang per buck from Television ads and internet ads on large websites like Google, Youtube, and Hulu.
Some 61% of Internet users said that only half or less of online information is reliable, which the project said was a new low.Big deal. There are tons of web sites to choose from, and I don't have to pay attention to sources I don't trust. And I can use my own criteria for judging which ones I trust. That goes right down to the individual poster on a bulletin board . . .“Even more disturbing is that 14% of Internet users said that only a small portion or none of the information online is reliable – a percentage that has grown for the past three years and is now at the highest level thus far in the Digital Future Project,” the study said.
Users are increasingly skeptical even of well-established search engines such as Google and Yahoo. Back in 2006, 64% users told the study they believe that most or all of the information provided by search engines was reliable and accurate. The current percentage if 56%.
I can use my own criteria for judging which ones I trust. That goes right down to the individual poster on a bulletin board . . .Amen! The Inet does a spectacular job of constantly reminding conscientious people that they themselves are responsible for their own critical thinking.
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.