“Newspapers are not in the “news” business, they are in the advertising business. News is the content that bring the eyeballs to their ads.”
Not really. It’s actually the advertisements that give the newspapers any value at all. We get the weekend paper, Fri-Sun, exclusively for the ads. The paper is so repulsive, so biased, that I read the Sunday comics, and a little bit of the sports page. Mrs. Brownsfan is the one who wants the ads.
The paper recently expanded “weekend” subscriptions to Fri-Mon, and then kicked the price up, as if we wouldn’t notice what they’re doing.
Every single time I get bored and venture into the paper to look at the “news” or the editorial page, it raises my blood pressure. Such epic bias and stupidity.
It has come to the point where the local once a week free paper has much more value than the daily newspaper.
Academics in the journalism field are already starting to murmur and write about the need for PUBLIC SUBSIDIES for newspapers.
Since they are an “indispensable public resource” and all.
Be on the lookout for that.
Not really
Yes really.
The ads pay for the newspapers. Subscriptions never covered the cost of operation. So you are buying the news papers for the ads, good. But then you could just pick up the PENNYSAVERS (a cheap paper filled with nothing but ads).
I would say you are in the minority, and may very well be the last gasp of newspapers as we have known them.
“Not really. It’s actually the advertisements that give the newspapers any value at all.”
No. CIB-173RDABN is 100% correct because if the newspaper can’t attract eyeballs to read the ads, they won’t get any ads and the revenue the ads bring ... hence the absolute need for eyeballs ... thus the newspaper death spiral consists of a continuous cycle of losing eyeballs due to shrinking interest, followed by losing ads ... once eyeballs go to zero, so does ad revenue ...