Newspapers are dropping like flies.

Disney maybe?

Yah no doubt huh?

lol

Yep. Our Rocky Mountain News is no more I had a feeling this was coming.

This will be rough on people with new puppies.

the LA Times and SF Chronicle are going to be huge landmarks in changing the face of the worlds news readership when they fall. Its just a matter of time IMHO. People are not going to just wake up and say "hey lets go buy papers and fuck reading on the internet". the fates are decided, its just a matter of watching it play out now. society is catching up with technology finally.

what do i use now to squash mosqitos? i can't throw my laptop after them

people read the paper online more and more. I was reading an article about papers thinking about making their sites pay or micro so you pay for the articles you read because ads alone arent cutting it.

i use the internet for news now its faster

They simply need to cut back jobs, salaries, and operations.

The only thing I know people read local paper for is...

1. Job Search.
2. Apartment or House Search.
3. Local Weekend Activities.

So they need to cut back accordingly, and put the rest of their bullshit online.

I wonder how viable those papers would be if they just completely cut all PHYSICAL production jobs (computerized typeset, printing, office staff, etc) and went purely DIGITAL. I mean, the value of their CONTENT speaks for itself, maybe the correct focus is on how to bring the business model into the Digital Age--streamline both information collection, editing, and monetization. With that said, maybe the largest hurdle is the huge overhead of running news bureaus and having reporters on the beat.

will be many more dying off

they just need to downsize print and focus on online. People will always want local news, however they might dump their newspaper and just watch TV new and websites. I'm glad I got out of the newspaper industry 8 years ago.

Yeah it is getting pretty ugly. I subscribe to the paper here, San Diego Union Tribune, I still like to read it over a cup of coffee. I know I can get the same news online, but I just like sitting there holding a paper. They have been getting thinner and thinner lately. Advertisers are pulling ads to save money. The whole print industry is fucked, cost too much to print.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/27/h...olutionize-pr/
looks like they are fighting back not dead yet
Hearst to launch wireless e-reader, potentially revolutionize print media
Hot on the heels of Amazon's highly anticipated Kindle 2 launch comes this: news that Hearst Corporation -- which publishes iconic magazines including Cosmopolitan and Esquire along with the San Francisco Chronicle -- will be launching its own wireless e-reader. While many may be quick to label this forthcoming device as a Kindle competitor, the concept behind this is far more elaborate than simply knocking Amazon from its perch. In an effort to "preserve the business model that has sustained newspapers and magazines" while moving forward with technology, Hearst is planning to ship a larger-than-usual reader (around the size of a standard sheet of paper), giving publishers (and advertisers, by extension) about the same amount of space as they're used to when pushing out e-articles. Reports suggest that the device -- which will do the monochrome thing until a color version debuts later -- could land as early as this year, with Hearst & Friends planning to sell them to publishers and "take a cut of the revenue derived from selling magazines and newspapers on these devices." No exaggeration here -- this may be the biggest news we've heard for print media in years, not to mention the promise of an all-new e-reader for gadget nerds to swoon over.

also for taking a crap a newspaper beats taking a laptop into the can with you.

I get my news from TV and internet. Newspapers around here were giving month long free trial subscriptions. All wound up in my recycling bin. More convenient to go online or watch TV. And you don't get all that newpaper ink all over your hands.

i like canadian globe and mail over lunch or whatever.

i personally havent read a newspaper in proably 9 years. ever since drudge report and cnn.com have been available.

matter of fact i get a paper everyday delivered to my door and it goes in the garbage. i don't like the ink on my hands and whoever paid for it obviously didnt change their address with the paper.

errrrrr.

LOL

But the trees and forests won't mind I guess.

closest thing to a newspaper I've read in probably 10 years is the "ValueSaver" thingy that is in my mail box 2x a week

I never liked to touch newspapers, they get your hands all dirty.

These papers are going out of business because they 'really' do not report unique news. Anyone with a TV can see what the next days paper will have 12 hours before. Then add in the Internet, and the popular articles in any news niche is totally different than what the newspaper media think is important.

1. Job Search. CRAIGSLIST
2. Apartment or House Search. CRAIGSLIST
3. Local Weekend Activities. WEEKLY ALTERNATIVE PAPER

Definitely a positive.

For each newspaper closed, dozens of jobs go down the shitter though.

True, but if people don't wanna buy a product anymore and a job gets obsolete, the smart people find other jobs. People working for newspapers are assumed to be smart for their writings. They will find a new way to exist. They have too. Nature works that way.

Newspapers. 2 words. News & Paper. Not the same. People want news all the time. Paper/Printing is a way of supplying it which is becoming obsolete because of the internet.

Since evolution in business or progress in common is unstopable, as being a newspaper I would evolve along with my clients/readers needs:
1) I need it NOW and not the next day or during office hours or depending on distribution
2) I wanna read it and I don't care how I obtain the info or thru which media or site
3) I want it free (if possible / cheap if nessecary)

If I had a newspaper (news & paper) I would make websites (nothing new..)
But I would NOT:
-charge 30 a month to read news...
-pay per article
-complicated things that scare off clients

So, for example, a newspaper does 50 million a year in revenue.
Makes 10% profit (=5 Million) because printing and distribution costs are high.
Would 10 Million in revenue on internet do with 50% profits ?
Stock exchanges/investors would not settle for revenue going from 50M going to 10M but if the nett profits could remain the same or similar there is a much BETTER business model.

I would pay to read (really new and accurate news) but not at ANY price.
Small micro billing and quick results like premium SMS would be the answer IMO.
Access 1 or several news sites for 1 premium SMS would be acceptable for most people I think and the sites would still offer ads. The email adres and phone number with people's intrests is worth money also to build a database if properly filed and used in the correct way.

It's more likely that a news provider can find clients that wanna pay $1 buck for one day, then to find clients that want to spend $20 a month wether there is any good news or not.
$1 =nothing/pocket change/tip money
$20 per month = an agreement / investment /a thought over choice
more people have 1, less people have or want to spend $20
1:5000 doing $20 monthly or 1:5 doing $1 daily when something interesting happens, that COULD be the question.

It's just my opinion, not an absolute truth. So fire away...
and I'll see it tommorrow since it's way past midnight here in Holland.

E-V-O-L-U-T-I-O-N

otherwise we'd still be writing on rocks.

the tech age has finally stomped out the dinosaurs and like TheDoc said, anything thats anything is on CNN 24/7 12 hours before you get it thrown on your front door. in todays day and age thats 11 hours and 59 minutes and 50 seconds too late. we want everything now, and in quantity.

payphones are next i'd imagine. any jerkwad drug dealer in the streets can now buy a burner. who the hell uses payphones when a throwaway phone is 9 dollars with minutes on it right next to the cash register at any super market. minus a few homeless people and some vagrants that dont even have 9 dollars maybe. that can't be a large demographic. even every high school kid is carrying a cell these days. shit my 9 year old cousin has a cell.

Trees everywhere rejoice!

Seriously, when there's the news community there is on the net, what reason is there to read physical newspapers anymore? It's all online now. People reliant on newspapers for news are probably struggling because everyone else is getting news so much faster. By the time the plane crash in the Hudson was in a newspaper, everyone already heard about it.