NY Times Death Spiral move?

NYTimes announces plan to charge readers for access to online content—http://bit.ly/8GqWDt
———–
This is a stop-gap measure that will generate news but will not save the Times from having to get serious about reinventing its business model. This death spiral move is not so apparent for a major-major brand such as the Times. It’s the rest of the newspaper industry and more importantly the fate of journalism that is at stake. Do some reading…the telegraph was supposed to bring death to the newspapers…until they used it themselves to bring “real-time” news directly to the editors at the local papers. This should be hearlded as the best time in history to start a newspackaging (can’t use trees anymore) company.  Think about it: world-wide distribution at zero cost, instant reporters on the ground at EVERY event world-wide (who got the pic of USAIR in the Hudson?) all you have to do is get back to editing and packaging what the consumer wants. Hint: biased editting, classifieds and stock price pages…isn’t what we want.

Consumers pay for the delivery of their news…always have. Get over it Murdoch et al and begin packaging…err okay NYT you just made this announcement and in the right direction. Hopefully, Yasmin will figure this out:”
———–
Message from Scott Heekin-Canedy: A Masthead Announcement
I am pleased to announce the appointment of Yasmin Namini as General Manager of a new Reader Applications business segment within The New York Times Media Group. Yasmin will add this title to her current role as SVP, Marketing and Circulation for NYTMG. The New York Times Media Group currently comprises four business segments: the newspaper, NYTimes.com, the International Herald Tribune and News Services.

Murdoch forgets about journalist and readers

In Rupert Murdoch’s recent WSJ editorial (from comments to FTC) he admits some failings, holds on to pay to read mentality and totally forgets about journalism’s role in newspapers demise and journalism’s potential role in news organizations (not paper) rise from the ashes. http://bit.ly/8qjYs5  

Some clear thinking in his editorial (1-awards do not equal customer satisfaction, 2-the Internet actually brings an unprecedented opportunity for journalists and news organizations with unlimited audience and source potential, 3-the old model was based on quasi-monopolies, 4-government should stay out).

 BUT as usual, very dense thinking too. Most egregious is his total lack of recognition that the journalists (and editors) themselves are of equal blame to the demise. They are not “fair and balanced”. They do not keep opinion to the editorial pages. Front page/buried page bias dominates on key issues. Headlines mislead (like Rupert’s freedom headline) and facts are buried away from the slant. Why else are journalists listed close to car sales people and politicians on respect and trust surveys?

 Journalism is key to freedom. Journalism must survive (perhaps re-born with the original tenets in place), but it will take journalists, editors and publishers committed to facts, democracy and we the people. They should be helping to dampen the current (nation paralyzing) polarization on key issues, not contributing to it.

 As for fighting the Google’s tsunami of readers, get a life Mr. Murdoch. Readers are your life-blood (who you and your newspapers have ignored for years). Google’s delivery of readers is the ONLY way you will attract the critical mass of readers to your sites that you have to have to survive.

Can anyone feel sorry for Washington Post?

Maybe the solution for such business incompetence is the same for our sorry (and also disrepected) congress. FIRE THEM ALL. This Internet distruction of the newspapers may be the best thing that has ever happened to journalism. It will force a new and smarter business model. Witness the 2008 winner of the Knight News Challenge: New Journalism funding model. Community funding for news they actually want to read! Knight News Challenge 2008 winner. http://bit.ly/D3sKN 

Why am I on a rampage this morning. Open the sports section of the WP. Check out the MLB standings. See the little “x” next to the Orioles. That “x” means: “We don’t give a damn about our readers.” (Forget that its the end of the season and they are in last place. This has happened all season.)

WHY…the “x” means there was a late game and presumably too late to update the standings. Okay…I get it. Physical papers have to be put to bed so they can be printed and delivered to our door step by the time coffee is brewing.

SO THEN TELL ME WHY THEY HAVE A STORY ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE THAT IS ABOUT THAT LATE NIGHT GAME. The story even has the new won-lost tally. So if it could be in an edited story, why in the hell couldn’t a table be updated at the same time. The answer is they don’t care about their readers.

If they were run like a business and one that had to actually compete, the person responsible for the sports section would be summarily fired. How can you have an article on one page about how the Orioles dodged the 100 loss season milestone and have the “I don’t care” X on the standings page?

Well wake up Post. You have to compete. You have to want readers. You have to respect readers. Show it by delivering what the readers want.

BTW…good move teaming up with Bloomberg for business news. Hopefully, you’ll put what resources you have left over to cover local business instead of cutting. We’ll see.

Disruptive technologies is nothing new.

Every industry has had to deal with technology disruption. Sometimes its even regulation that disrupts an industry, but it’s not new. In 1896 Congress passed the “Rural Free Delivery Act of 1896″. This ensured that all mail would get delivered even to remote areas. Equate this with regulation requiring telcos to serve the mid-west where homes are miles from each other. It would have been more cost effective to abandon those markets and just serve the high density cities.

Anyway, Sears-Roebuck the year before put out their 532 page mail-order catalog. Imagine how this disintermediated the general store. The customers got wider and newer selections, delivered to their door at competitive prices including delivery. Was there a government bail out for local stores? Did local stores go out of business? Did they have to change…probably. Service and fairer margins and providing credit were probably their value-adds.

My point is, it is no different today. Capitalism rewards change…change that the purchaser wants…not those that whine the most. So journalists…stop whinning, stop riding the broken tangible newspaper model and find a business model that delivers what your readers want.

Better, faster and cheaper communication is better. Distribution is free and your potential audience is world-wide…perfect for your mission. Never has journalism been positioned so well to deliver value.

Newspapers as delivery vehicle for journalists is dead.

It’s done, it’s over…distribution of commoditized content on paper by a paperboy is dead. Journalists need to focus on new B2B distribution models to reach the consumer…which btw will be exclusively electronic in 10 years or so. B2B distribution models not anti-consumer DRM or news consortiums so the news corps can continue their previously enjoyed monopolies. www.tinyurl.com/cwt-ecextra for more on this diatribe.
(originally posted July 09 on cwterry.wordpress.com

Perfect environment to start an enewspaper

RT @tdefren Mainstream Media Relations: More Important Than Ever http://bit.ly/hhTGc  

What you describe is an environment ripe for creating an all new news organization (Like USA Today did…an instant national newspaper using the new then satellite technology).

Consider: free distribution (no trucks), world-wide audience, zero incremental cost per reader (no paper or ink costs), the next generation of readers are exclusively dedicated to the medium (to hell with the old farts who still want stock prices in 5pt), extend your voice with hyper-distribution of stories, near-zero cost of creating community (by supporting volumes of feedback), end-user controlled customization of layout and content, real-time updates (no press deadlines) AND actual proof that ads placed get read and reacted to…

WOW, there must be a journalism pony in there somewhere! It’s the perfect storm for journalism: infinite audience and zero cost of reaching them.

What’s missing? Credibility, editorial oversite and the guts to start a world-wide e-paper. While the papers are whining about Craigs list, they’ll also watch someone come in add wipeout the remaining franchise they have.