Posted on 06/11/2012 8:53:11 AM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
The Washington Post is, perhaps, the best known newspaper in the world. Yes, the Post has a resounding, historic name: but, baby, look at it now.
Today's Post has suddenly come to symbolise everything that's contentious about daily journalism's survival in the 21st century, and thus to pose two crucial questions. Is the Wall Street way a viable approach to running a newspaper these days? And how do you cope with the surge to news online: by charging customers, or giving your news away free?
In America, these battles are being fought out between the quasi-academic likes of the Columbia Journalism Review and Professor Clay Shirky of New York University, the supreme guru of internet ideology. But first catch up with some facts.
The Washington Post Company's newspaper division has lost money in 13 of the last 15 quarters. Total loss over that period: $412m. The latest quarterly figures reveal a $23m loss and a 7% drop in revenue. Indeed, revenue has now slithered down in 20 of the last 22 quarterly returns. Last year's annual figures show it at $314m, a third less than in 2006. Print advertising has shrivelled by 53% in that period. As for digital ad revenue, and supposed salvation, that's down too – by 8% in the new returns. Amazingly, it too has slipped back over the past five years.
In short, everything's shrinking: the money coming in, the future – and the newsroom, now getting by on around half its former staffing. The most recent cull has reduced the investigation team from seven to four. It's a stark and cautionary tale – at least for Ryan Chittum in the Columbia review. And he has two great beefs against the people – the management suits – he holds responsible.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Of course, this is only part of the problem, the other is that technology is not their friend. People don't need to buy a paper anymore. What's that saying ... adapt or die?
The only people to blame are standing in the mirror in the bathroom of the paper. Lies don’t sell forever.
Why pay to read 5500 words on Barrys’ love of basketball?
An increasing majority of consumers are sick of the liberal echo chamber. Period.
An increasing majority of consumers are sick of the liberal echo chamber. Period.
Being a left-wing, Commie rag, the Guardian would never print a story that exposes the bias of the Washington Post at the cause of its demise.
So what is sad about another commie rag going down the tubes?
Warren Buffet, the greedy multi-billionaire that he is, owns a substantial portion of the Washington comPost, so expect it and the other papers he owns to get a bailout, paid by you, me and his secretary.
Confronted with a decline in sales (read Craigslist) newspapers are trying to monetize the only thing they have left; news coverage. To force payment, the newspapers are turning away from advertising in favor of a limit on the number of “visits” to their web pages. Never mind that this practice limits the exposure of their web ads...
Confused ? Me too.
Advice to the Post: concentrate on absorbency; it’s all you have left.
Wall Street doesn’t influence the way liberal editors run their newsrooms.
The ever declining base in print and television news is commercial suicide but the die-hard Lefties continue to push PURE propaganda and the public knows it.
Daily newsprint is a dead medium. It arrives on your doorstep (without milk or a doctor housecall) and it is already 16-48 hours old information.
SAD decline? Hardy har, har.
Maybe they could bring in Bain Capital to make it profitable?
The Post and other papers are dying because of technology and nothing else. Even a 100 percent conservative newspaper today would be dying. It has to do with Ipads and other items that give you instant news and the stories that go with it. London is a bit different in that most rid the subway to work so they have the time to read an actual newspaper or some will read the Ipad but they will have newspapers longer than America because of the transportation differences.
If they had done things the “Wall Street” way, they wouldn’t be a dying newspaper or corporation.
The Wall Street way if the “free market” way, which means that, the corporation caters to the wishes of the people who are the target audience, but, when half of the target audience is automatically and intentionally disregarded and alienated, then, the newspaper will, of course, be writing it’s own death certificate.
Years ago I got the Washington Post Weekly,
Then for two weeks running there was about a ten page insert explaining the damned virtues of Saudi Arabia, paid for by said govt.
There are NO virtues in regards Saudi Arabia. I understood then that the post had simply become a whore.
One is the Wall Street beef – the way the overarching Post company, to which the news division only makes an 11% or so revenue contribution, has paid out $1.1bn in dividends and share buyback schemes over the past four years of the credit crunch. This bigger Post, owner of a profitable education operation, could have used some or all of that money to keep the newspaper fed and watered.
Yeah, the *nerve* of the parent corporation to expect a profit from the noble WaPo. They just don't understand news organizations are supposed to be losers (they're something bad if they make a buck), and they need to be subsidized for "the good of the people."
It can't be that the country is sick of the liberal dreck or anything.
Look forward to the day when the propaganda post is out of business.
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.