Now, a word from the other side

As long-time readers know, I really like print publications and believe they have a future. I'll give you some reasons why, but first here's the other side: Jordan Kurzweil at TechCrunch.com says "It’s been said before, but it needs saying again (and again and again): PRINT IS DEAD."

Kurzweil, CEO of a digital company, makes a good argument for why print has no future and that media companies should clear the decks for a digital future if they have any hopes of having a future.

My quibble is that he's ignoring media history, which shows that media has adapted tremendously over the years and few forms of media actually die. Most evolve. (Remember radio was going to kill newspapers, television was going to kill radio -- and certainly kill newspapers; none of that happened.) The point is that media evolves rather than dies.

As I look across the room to a iPad and type on a laptop while watching the Wisconsin-Ohio State basketball game on television, I certainly appreciate digital media, especially well-designed web sites. But I keep seeing people reading and buying print products, and I can't imagine some of them -- think National Geographic magazine -- losing a print presence.

And, in fact, some of his arguments try to argue both points. After making an argument that people want digital rather than print, he then says that Patch "can't seem to find readers or revenue," and, after making are argument that content and technology are equal, he states that content is the "most cherished" asset. Sorry but one can't have it both ways.

Still, Kurzweil has some good points. Print media has been poorly managed, although I think it's getting better lately. Younger audiences skew digital; most old media web platforms are awful; and, of course, that print revenues are declining.

Read his article. It's thought-provoking.

Print newspapers most trusted for election news

A few years ago one of the speakers Marquette Journalism brought in to discuss our field's future talked about something newspaper had that, she said, was a unique and valuable asset. That was the trust of the industry's readers.

Now comes a survey of likely voters in the 2012 general election that shows she was correct -- the most trusted source of election information is print newspapers. At the same time, there appears little trust in blogs and social media. The report in the Christian Science Monitor quotes Ben Agger, director of the Center for Theory at the University of Texas, Arlington’s Sociology Department, as saying that people haven't trusted politicians since Watergate. Now, he says,“they don't trust news media to provide anything but infotainment,” with print newspapers trust numbers higher than the rest.

Boston newspaper eschews the Net -- and it pays

Meet the Boston Courant, a weekly of 40,000 readers and rising, one that is profitable and filled with advertising.

What doesn't it have: a website.

Nor does it have a Twitter feed, a Facebook page or anything else to do with the Internet.

It's not that publisher David Jacobs doesn't appreciate the Internet, Nieman Reports says, it's just that it doesn't seem to make business sense to him. To paraphrase, the current business model ain't broke, so why fix it? Jacobs is not alone in eschewing the Internet; many other weeklies aren't on the web. But he has spent more than $50,000 designing a web page (eight years ago), but just doesn't see the business model that would make exchanging his current system for a digital one work.

With paywalls thudding down all around, maybe he's right.

Gannett adds paywalls

Gannett announced plans to erect paywalls for "scores of local community newspapers nationwide," according to reports. Nine of its community papers already have paywalls, most of the rest will be getting them now.

But not USA Today -- at least for the present. The company said it had no plans to erect a paywall for its national newspaper.

Of course, money is the reason. The company said that print and broadcast advertising revenues were way down pushing it to find other revenue sources -- like paywalls for digital.

Wisconsin newspaper numbers hold up

Amid all the despair and gloom covering the traditional media business these days, it's nice to see a bit of facts thrown in that might dispel some of that dark cloud. The Wisconsin Newspaper Association reports that not only are there as many newspapers published in the state (similar to national reports), but readership is growing due to fast-growing digital readership.

Speaking of digital readership, sparking up a glum earnings report for the fourth quarter of last year, Milwaukee's Journal Communications, Inc., publisher of the Journal Sentinel, reported 8,800 digital-only subscribers in the month and a half since it erected a paywall with 75% of them outside the newspaper's print delivery area. Print and broadcast advertising declined, but digital advertising continues to grow.

The reader numbers -- and holding steady on number of newspapers -- isn't bad for a "dying" industry.

Don't blow it, media

Yet more evidence that despite the growth of new media, Americans turn to old media for their news. The report, on NPR's Early Edition (follow the link to the NPR site, which will play the audio story), relies heavily on a Pew Research report to demonstrate that, when it comes to election news, Americans want old media.

"Social media has been much heralded but relatively little used by average voters and average citizens," according to Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center.

He may be correct, but old media -- with news operations cutting reporter positions and subsequent loss of content and advertising continuing to shift away from heavily-used media in favor of cheap and unproven Internet options -- continue to miss the point. Audiences are driven to trusted sources. Let's hope someone on the media side cuts the slow version of seppuku being practiced by old media.

Professionalism of newspapers in India questioned

I recently spent a couple of weeks teaching a Marquette University Diederich College of Communication-sponsored journalism workshop in Ahmadabad, India, so I was struck by this story from Bloomberg View concerning journalism at the two top -- and growing -- print newspapers in India. Together they sell more than five million newspapers a day.

Basically, the story attacks the journalism of the two, the Times of India and the Hindu, finding it lacking in much of the basic integrity as well as professionalism seen in journalism around the world. I talked with executives from the Times of India, and both in informal and formal speeches they echoed some of the concerns about how journalism is practiced in their country.

Further, Father Vincent Braganza, head of St. Xavier's College, which promoted the workshop we taught, was quite open in his disappointment concerning journalism in India, which he said was shallow, lacking in ethics and rife with errors -- all elements of the Bloomberg story.

My view after reading the Indian papers for two weeks, is that the criticism is quite true. The Times of India would be considered sensationalist by American standards. Word choice is atrocious, and errors are common. Frankly, the Hindu is dull.

Father Braganza's solution is the teaching of journalism, which is rare in that country. Only a handful of journalism programs exist, he said, with most journalists trained in English departments. Father Braganza says that means they lack grounding in ethics and philosophy. That would explain the shortcomings seen in the Bloomberg piece. Despite growing sales, that lack of professionalism bodes ill for India's future.

Social media more addictive than tobacco or alcohol

I'm sure it's not going to come as a surprise to anyone, but a new study showed that social media -- especially Facebook and Twitter -- are more addictive than tobacco or alcohol. I do believe that it had good ramifications for the news business since it is getting more closely integrated into social media.

Social media continues to stir us up

Boy, are we conflicted about social media. A new study reported on Online Media today says we "hate" it when we are targeted on social media, but we "like" it when companies offer social media sites.

A good bit of this comes from various privacy issues Facebook has had over the years. People clearly don't trust the site, but they use it.

Advertising teasing their Super Bowl TV commercials

If you believe as I do that content is king, there's an intriguing new trend among advertisers to tease their Super Bowl TV commercials online in advance of the big game.

A New York Times story on the commercials focuses on moves by Volkswagen to tease its commercial on YouTube. It quotes Mike Sheldon, chief executive at Deutsch L.A., the agency it says created VW commercials last year and this year as well as this year's YouTube teaser, a takeoff on "Star Wars" called the "Bark Side" as saying the tease produces a "halo effect." Viewers "like to be let in on the joke, let in on the story early," Sheldon says.

It's also a wonderful example of how interconnected we are all becoming. I read a print story, am posting it on the Internet about a company's using the Internet to promote television commercials.

Tablets continue cutting into print sales

I've had this sneaking feeling ever since seeing the first tablet that it was the future of news media delivery. Nothing has dissuaded me from that belief.

Latest evidence is research reported on paidContent.org that showed professionals owning tablets are using much less printed product. In fact, 72 percent are buying fewer newspapers, 70 percent are buying fewer books, and 49 percent fewer DVDs.

And, by the way, Robert Andrews of paidContent.org gets special props for using "fewer than" rather than the incorrect "less than" you generally see.

A related story in the New York Times showed that ownership of tablets and e-readers almost doubled over the holidays. 'Tis true even in the Byers/McBride/Caspari household, which now boasts an iPad being used mostly as an e-reader. A Kindle Fire is on the horizon.

Newspaper industry should look at cable TV's past

So what is the future for newspapers? An interesting essay by Nathan Myhrvold on Bloomberg View says newspapers should look at how cable television built a market even with free competition.

The answer: Quality and quantity of content.

He asks: "Could newspaper journalism likewise entice readers to pay for online news? People like quality journalism, so I believe that, ultimately, they can be persuaded to pay for it. But as with cable, the price will have to start low; it can then inch upward as the public gradually accepts the new business model."

Of course, the newspaper industry is headed the other way by cutting staff, which means less quality and quantity.