Print is still king

...so says this link: http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/04/print-is-still-king-only-3-percent-of-newspaper-reading-actually-happens-online/

Apologies if this has been posted already, but I didn't see it anywhere yet..

 

That really doesn't say much. Could indicate that newspapers aren't making an impact on the Web or that newspapers aren't emphasizing it much. You'd have to compare the combined total views to views of non-paper Web sites, and with TV news ratings.

 

I'm not necessarily disputing this, but I am questioning it.

What, exactly, is a "page impression," particularly with regard to a printed newspaper? And, how is that determined and measured?

I may be missing something but, after reading this link, I am not clear on that, either according to Langeveld, or the NAA research stats linked therein. And this goes especially if these numbers are not the same as circulation, which, according to the story, they're not.

 

I'm guessing they are multiplying the pages by the number of people who look at each paper, on average.

 

Yeah. I think Rick is right.
There is some kind of 1.2-1.4 multiplying per household. That's the formula often used.
But, that doesn't get us to an answer. I'm thinking it's one big false conclusion.

 

I thought Bob Wills was still the king.

 

I thought it was Jerry Lawler

 

well done, F_B

 

Getting a bit convoluted to compare "page impressions" on web vs. print. Given the same level of awkward translation, my TV is good for a couple thousand page views in a given day.

 

Played my Waylon CD on the way to work today.

 

That's nice. Wake me up if it ever translates into paying jobs. If not, who gives a fuck?