1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Columbia Grad Student has all the answers on Newspaper survival

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Piotr Rasputin, Aug 16, 2009.

  1. Piotr Rasputin

    Piotr Rasputin New Member

    http://mashable.com/2009/08/14/newspaper-survival/

    Sigh.

    Had this article been written six or seven years ago, it would have contained some new ideas. Had it been written a decade ago, it could have been the start of a blueprint.

    Today, it just sounds like something he's regurgitating from his professors and media people trying to hold down their jobs attempting to figure this stuff out. Both are groups which can't admit that the ship has long since sailed.
     
  2. OnTheRiver

    OnTheRiver Active Member

    If I had a nickel for every time an Ivory Tower chucklehead told me what would save the industry, I'd have retired from the industry by now.
     
  3. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    I read far more newspaper content from aggregate sites than from newspaper sites. Newspaper sites just aren't very good, most chains adopt a standard platform that limits what you can do to "sell" a story.
     
  4. jemaz

    jemaz Member

    Dan:

    I must disagree. I don't know what the answer is that will save newspapers, although I do believe they will be saved. I very much enjoy newspaper sites. I think most of them are very good (azcentral, in particular, along with the NY Times and Wall Street Journal -- I do find Media General sites incredibly annoying). The aggregate sites I hardly ever even visit. Mostly because I find them too impersonal and lacking in feel for the community, which obviously is not there.
     
  5. GRUDGE

    GRUDGE Member

    Those who can do, those who can't teach. All of those tenured idiots that can't lose their jobs telling us what to do.
     
  6. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    I think the philosophy of "local-local" just doesn't work as well on the web. If a local newspaper would give a stronger presence to national stories, the "this is what is going on in the world" type stuff instead of cluttering it up by giving more play to meeting announcements, and book sales, I think they would draw more people in. I like Yahoo's home page, it gives you what's going on in the world, your local area, sports, entertainment, business, weather.
     
  7. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    And meanwhile, more paper circle the drain, taking people's jobs with them.

    A big reason "Ivory Tower chuckleheads" are offering ideas is because people within the industry either don't have them or aren't listening. As Bill Wyman's piece points out (and maybe this thread should be merged with that one), newspapers have been engaged in a 20-year rope-a-dope of trying to satisfy Wall Street and keep whatever monopoly they think they have, rather than take any second to figure out the Internet and how they must adapt to it.

    These folks might have all the answers, but the industry itself so far has had none of them.
     
  8. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    The philosophy of local-local on the web is all about trying to offer something no one else has. I think the opposite -- if you gave hyperlocal stuff like real estate sales, meeting minutes, police and fire reports, arts listings, school news, etc., a lot of play, you could not only generate a loyal readership, but you also might be able to charge them for it, and sell it to local advertisers who know what eyes your site is getting.

    The web is all about niches. I don't go to the Indianapolis Star's web site to read about Obama -- I go to keep up with local stuff going on in my hometown. I don't go to the Daily Southtown to get its thoughts on the governor's office -- I go because it provides blow-by-blow coverage of the goings-on with my village council and because it puts up police reports.
     
  9. golfnut8924

    golfnut8924 Guest

    "The web is all about niches. I don't go to the Indianapolis Star's web site to read about Obama -- I go to keep up with local stuff going on in my hometown. I don't go to the Daily Southtown to get its thoughts on the governor's office -- I go because it provides blow-by-blow coverage of the goings-on with my village council and because it puts up police reports."

    Agreed. You can go anywhere to read up on national and world news. But the only place to go to read about last night's local high school game is your local newspaper. I've never understood what is so hard about making people pay to read content online. There's a billion websites out there that you have to pay to subscribe to; why can't newspapers do it? Are they afraid they will get undermined by an entrepreneur who will give it away for free? Until that happens, make people pay for online content just like they pay for the print issue.

    Bottom line is this: as long as sports are played, there will ALWAYS be a need for people to report on them. So whether the outlet is a newspaper, magazine, website or even the next piece of technology that has yet to be invented, there will always be sports reporting. People are always going to want to read about the game, the team, the players. Sports reporting will never go away; it will simply (well, not exactly simply) change to different outlets as technology changes.
     
  10. spaceman

    spaceman Active Member

    Columbia grad student? Great, hey kid, go fill these paste pots, would ya? and then run downstairs and pick me up some smokes and a pint of Old Rotgut at Willie's. Oh, and don't forget to put down a fin for me on the Pick Three. Not the state one, the "other" one. You know my numbers.
     
  11. schiezainc

    schiezainc Well-Known Member

    Excuse me guys, I'm going to go write an article on "12 things that will save critical patients with heart problems". See, I'm young so that clearly means I can throw my opinion around and play pretend like I know what the heck I'm talking about, too. :)
     
  12. OnTheRiver

    OnTheRiver Active Member

    1. Don't eat pork anymore.

    2. Quit smoking.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page