|
February 23, 2009
Support your local dinosaur!
And fight the asteroid threat! I have long considered the daily newspaper to be one of the hallmarks of civilized society. I say this despite my innumerable disagreements and complaints about slanted stories, editorials masquerading as "news reports," and biased or dishonest reporting (or deliberate non-reporting, which is even worse). But biased or not, daily newspapers provide at least a common cultural denominator which tend to tie an area together, the way a college student newspaper might. So I am very sorry to see that the owner of the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Daily News has filed for bankruptcy protection: Philadelphia Newspapers L.L.C., which owns The Inquirer, the Philadelphia Daily News, and Philly.com, filed for bankruptcy protection yesterday in a bid to restructure its $390 million in debt load.There you go. migration of readers to the Internet Well, all I can say is don't blame me. I not only used to read the Inquirer avidly, but I subscribed for many years, and as longtime readers know, I was a tireless linker of Inquirer articles. Assuming that a certain percentage of readers click on the links, that means I did more than my part to increased the Inquirer's online visibility -- especially to out-of-the-area readers who might have otherwise never read it. Of course, the Inquirer is not alone: The Philadelphia Newspapers filing follows last month's bankruptcy filing by the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The Journal Register Co., based in Yardley and the publisher of a number of local daily and weekly newspapers, filed for bankruptcy Saturday. Just last week, the publicly traded New York Times Co. suspended its dividend to cope with the economic downturn.As to how much of this results from free news on the Internet, I don't know. How many non-subscribers are there who read the Inquirer online in order to save money? I've speculated before that growing illiteracy might be playing a larger role than is commonly acknowledged, and over the decades I've seen the Inquirer's style and content degenerate in countless ways. When I discussed this issue several years ago, I linked a Heartland Institute piece titled "Declining Literacy a Threat to Newspapers" which analogized the illiteracy threat to asteroids (and newspapers to the clueless dinosaurs who were done in): U.S. newspapers have a life-or-death interest in schoolchildren being taught how to read and becoming motivated to read regularly.I'll say. The piece was written in 2002, but it's essential conclusions are more timely now than ever. Newspaper editorialists have been known to scoff at parents who demand schools return to such "pre-modern" basics as the use of phonics in beginning reading. Those columnists might want to reconsider whether they themselves are the real dinosaurs. After all, whose existence is imperiled by the asteroid named illiteracy?Read it all. Os special concern to me was Arnold Kling's analysis of spending on newspapers by age group: The highest spending relative to the general population came from 65- to 74-year-olds, who spent 136 percent of the national average on newspaper subscriptions or single-copy purchases. The lowest spending on newspapers came from the 18- to 24-year-olds, who spent just 25 percent of the national average.This was old news years ago, but I think my reaction at the time bears repeating: This is grim news. And it certainly can't be blamed on bloggers.I still wish there was something I could do, and while it's not much, there is something. Poor Detroit has an embattled but old newspaper (the Detroit Free Press, which goes back to 1831), and I've been a loyal subscriber since I moved to Ann Arbor. Returning from California, I found this notice from the Free Press that made me laugh derisively: Talk about paying more and getting less! My initial reaction was "There goes my daily paper!" Because, it really isn't a daily paper if it isn't delivered daily. I thought I should just cancel the silly thing. But now that I've thought it over, I've decided I won't, because the dinosaurs need help. posted by Eric on 02.23.09 at 01:03 PM
Comments
We subscribe to the Inquirer, and to the Wall St Journal. We've considered switching to internet only for WSJ and we've also considered cancelling the Inky, but I think I'd still pay something for online access to the latter. Filing for bankruptcy is better than the alternative being mooted the other week -- a bailout by Ed Rendell / Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. A reorganization will allow Tierney et al to escape the shackles of various unions and reinvent itself as a twenty-first century media entity. And, just think, you will probably be able to buy a subscription to read on your Kindle II, just like Instapundit! LB Philly · February 23, 2009 03:39 PM I have not had a daily paper for several years, and I am in the over 65 group. I get the on line subscription for about the same price so I still get the paper but do not have to dispose of the paper, and they do not have to buy or deliver paper. Hugh · February 23, 2009 05:13 PM The "rising costs of newsprint" is a factor which should drop, both because of the deflationary pressures on prices in general and because of the shrinkage in the size and number of newspapers. Bleepless · February 23, 2009 08:49 PM They could turn this around by doing their jobs and reporting the news. Brett · February 24, 2009 08:04 AM For decades I have been a parasite on the newspaper business by reading newspapers in libraries and later online. In that sense I bear some responsibility for the decline of newspapers. Had the news media not been so much in the tank for Obama, I would feel more regret. Gringo · February 24, 2009 10:23 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
February 2009
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
February 2009
January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Do I have to upgrade to the fix to the patch that's fixing to bug my fix?
Avoid Accidents - Smoke Pot Support your local dinosaur! And fight the asteroid threat! dodging snow and missing signs Missouri break Boston Globe - End Heroin Prohibition race is hell Music Is Going To Bits Surplus Justice American Style
Links
Site Credits
|
|
The Detroit Free Press is being stupid. You don't provide the same content online as you do offline, you provide more content.
And online you can add that content pretty damn quick, with no need to wait for the presses to run. The Union/Tribune's Newsblog posts local stories pretty much as they come in. There is an example of how a newspaper site could expand their coverage. But not only with blogging employees, with volunteer bloggers as well.
The UT or Free Press could provide space for private citizens to blog about their neighborhoods or communities. But that would require effort on the paper's part to set up the space, recruit bloggers, and keep track of them and their audience. Effort I doubt many papers would be ready to make.
But one day somebody will make that effort. They will make it work and that will change journalism forever.