Do Newspapers Still Make Sense?

I'm a big fan of p.m. papers ... as it is, I kick the a.m. out of my way out the door on my way to work, like most people, I think, and pick it up when I get home. but the freak out would be so huge by this change that no one is going to try it for fear of cranky seniors railing on about the change.

 

capitol times tried going to a true p.m. format a few years ago, pushing back delivery until 2 p.m. or later. maybe it was the market (though i'd think in an academic market like madison, there'd be demand for this), but we all know how that story ended -- greatly reduced print presence, layoffs from the newsroom when they went online heavy.

 

The problem with PMs is the same problem that has always plagued PMs.
The production cycle. Deadline is between 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. for afternoon delivery. So the idea that a PM could react to the current day's newscycle comes from people who have never worked at a daily PM.

 

Strong coverage of 9/11 made it into the local p.m. I subscribe to.

Anything after 11:00 p.m. the night before doesn't make it into the local a.m. I don't buy.

And that, along with the a.m.'s crappy sports section, is precisely why I buy one and not the other.

 

A previous stop was an AM/PM hybrid (too much good stuff, I guess) that only lightly remade the paper in the morning. For this to work, the delivery would need to be timed to be near the late afternoon, after people have stopped surfing at work. That said, in big cities traffic would be a concern for timely delivery.

 

Of course newspapers still make sense.

Try covering a table with your laptop next time your child wants to finger paint.

Let me tell you, it makes one hack of a mess.

 

what about a later p.m.?

say, timed for delivery about 6 p.m.

you are dealing with rush-hour traffic concerns in big cities, but nothing a few wacky bicycle couriers couldn't avoid.

 

"News cycle" stuff goes online where it belongs. Features, entertainment and enterprise goes in the PM pub, along with a quick roundup of the day's news to that point.

I think what Red suggested could be done. He's not talking about a "breaking news" PM paper in most cases. And I have worked at a couple of daily PMs.

 

PM I worked at always was the better written paper, as it was supposed to be. When it shifted to an AM operation, the writing got worse. Maybe giving people something to read is a possible way out of the darkness.

 

So, no news in the newspaper?
PMs "time of digestion" has always worked against the paradigm. It works only in point of sale and rack sales to commuters.

 

The newspaper as a primary news delivery system is dead, fw. Accept that. These days, the people who still look toward a newspaper as their primary source of news are already at or past retirement age.

Breaking news needs to be online, where the 21st century reader expects it.

 

100 percent true.

I've long been an advocate of a PM or weekly news analysis paper. Charge $3 or $4 for it and write and photograph the hell out of things.