News, politics and the media in the River City
Subscribe to the feed Feed
Comments feed Comments feed
BlogPeoria site-wide feed BlogPeoria site-wide feed

Media: How to transition from dead trees to online

October 4, 2007 in Watchdog Tags: , , , , , ,

dead_tree.jpgI’m still thinking about my post about Scott Adams belief that it’s an economic fact that online will eventually replace print media. There have a been many predictions about the demise of the newspaper. Some of the dates in those predictions have come and passed. But ad sales DO continue to decline. Newspapers DO continue to lay off staffers, or nor replace reporters who quit or retire.

Maybe they will still be around five years from now. Maybe not. But they almost certainly won’t be printed on paper 100 years from now. The only question is exactly when the last dead-tree newspaper will be printed. The trick for newspapers is to be one of those that make the transition to online.

Here are some radical ideas. All are based on the premise that the decline of print and the rise of online is NOT something to be staved off. Instead, it is something to be embraced and encouraged. It lowers fixed costs and lets news organizations devote the majority of their expenses toward paying people to gather the news, not toward killing trees and tossing them on porches:

  1. Hold a meeting of all employees. Tell them that effective immediately, their paychecks are coming from an online news organization. Tel them that job of print-only reporter/editor has been eliminated. Tell them they all have jobs as reporters for your Web site, if they are willing to commit to it.
  2. All deadlines are now “as soon as you get a story done that is reasonably free of spelling errors and typos.” Then put the article on line ASAP. Additional details can be added as they come in. Back in the ancient times, they called this “beating the competition.”
  3. Take all “feature-y” content out of the dead-tree version of the newspaper. This includes the comics page, the bridge column, cross words, sports stats, stock prices, etc. Don’t give anyone ANY reason to go out and buy a copy of the paper. Put it ALL online instead. Your print version should be a stripped-down version of the online version, not the other way around.
  4. Raise the price of single issues. The Peoria Journal Star charges $1 on weekdays. Double it. Then triple it if sales don’t drop enough. If senior citizens complain and stop buying, then, well, screw them. The survival of your news business is at stake, and senior citizens aren’t going to be customers in 10 years anyway, to be blunt about it. Besides, if my mother can get the news online, so can yours.
  5. Restrict ad sales in the newspaper only to those who also buy ads online. After a year or two, stop selling ads in the newspaper altogether. Wean your advertisers off dead trees because it is in your interest to do so.
  6. Start charging people to gain full access to your online content. Do it now. Don’t wait. Online subscriptions should be far less than the cost of a daily newspaper subscription. It should cost customers less because it costs media companies far less. Putting your local content online stinks for free stinks. It is stupid. You paid people to produce it, you paid syndicates for the features. You have the right to make a buck, and people will pay because your newspaper is STILL the only place they can get that much local content and the quality content I’m assuming your employees produce. And if you’re NOT producing high-quality content, you are screwed anyway, so stop reading.
  7. Make sure the amount of news online on any given day exceeds the amount in the dead tree edition. Also, there’s no real reason to NOT give your online readers access to more comics and columns that you could fit in your newspaper. Stop thinking in terms of limited space.
  8. Train your reporters and editors to write for online. Readability is now the only consideration. Learn how to avoid journalistic shorthand. Stop thinking in terms of limited space.
  9. Do not hire bloggers to replace reporters. Guys like C.J. Summers and myself have a watchdog role to play, but the meat and potatoes of journalism is the full-time reporter who covers a beat. There is no substitute for an experienced beat reporter who knows where the bodies are buried and who works for a newspaper that likes to uncover the corpses (not that there aren’t bloggers who aren’t capable of digging up a body or two). Going online-only lets your newspaper spend money on reporters, not to ship rolls of paper and barrels of ink to your plant, then to deliver copies of your paper door to door. It’s the 21st-frigging-century for crying out loud. However, if you want to pay bloggers to provide added value and hits to your online product, feel free. Call me.
  10. Take down the firewall between today’s online news and your archives. If anything, charge for new stories, and give away yesterday’s news for free instead. It is stupid that newspapers do the opposite. Make access to old stories at minimum easy to access as today’s stories. Someone reading about last night’s city council meeting should be able to click on a link to last week’s council meeting, AND the one five years ago when they discussed the very same issue.



12 Responses to “Media: How to transition from dead trees to online”

  1. AnotherExJSer Says:

    Regarding No. 6: Why do you suppose very few news outlets seem to be able to do this successfully? The Wall Street Journal does, but there has been a lot of speculation that Murdoch will make it free. The NY Times just got rid of Times Select. The trend appears to be going in the opposite direction.

    But there doesn’t seem to be any ceiling on what people are willing to pay for cable TV. What is the secret? People may view TV almost as a drug. You just sit passively and let it do its work. Reading news, like many components of being a responsible citizen of a democracy, requires effort and is sometimes uncomfortable.

    Regarding No. 9: That’s quite a concession for a blogger.

  2. Billy Dennis Says:

    Why? Because they skip steps 1-5. You have to get people cured of their dead tree addiction.

  3. C. J. Summers Says:

    I want the paper in hard copy. I don’t want to rely on internet access for my news, anymore than I would want to rely on hard copy papers for my news. Why does one have to “win” over the other? Radio didn’t do away with print. TV didn’t do away with radio. Don’t you think there’s a market for both hard copy and virtual news content?

  4. anonymous Says:

    Wow, you could work at a newspaper. Call the Times Observer.

  5. BJ Stone Says:

    So I’ll go with the minority and say Billy has some really good ideas here. And he’s right, there will not be printed editions in 100 years, maybe less.

    Likewise, C.J. makes a good point that radio and TV didn’t do away with print because you can’t sit down at your leisure and get the news on radio and TV like you can the paper, I freely admit that. TV didn’t do away with radio because there are still places where radio has huge advantages over TV (work, in car, etc.). Now, as a radio person, I’m fully aware and have complained long and loud about how many things radio has done wrong over the years, but it still exists, and is in fact beating back a challenge from satellite “radio”. But radio has done some things right, for instance evolving away from soap operas and variety shows (radio staples until the 40’s) when TV came along, and adjusting how they programmed their stations.

    Over the years, TV had opportunities where they succeeded in taking things away from radio (time and temp, weather have become, sadly, TV’s territory now, radio hasn’t kept up because so many of it’s “consultants” don’t want to interrupt the same 200 song playlist for ANYTHING), but TV also had areas where they could have eaten into radio’s audience that they blew, like MTV and VH1 losing their roots and ignoring videos. Does MTV even run ANY videos anymore?

    But both of them couldn’t kill off the newspaper PRINT business. The internet, on the other hand, will do to papers what Alex Bell’s little invention did to the telegraph. Sometimes things just go away. Carving drawings on walls like the ancient Egyptians? Gone. Scrolls? Gone. Likewise, it will happen to print. Billy has some good thoughts here, any paper publisher worth his or her salt will take a look at that list with an open mind and possibly start moving forward to make changes. I think those papers that embrace this list will still be around, as they are still the best news-gathering organizations in most every major city, many times based solely on the mere size of their organization.

  6. prego man Says:

    If the laptop and WI-FI were a woman, Billy, you’d be the father of 12 by now. Alas, a woman is still made of flesh and blood, and the newspaper is still the preferred source of news for those who like things to be slightly… well, real. Ironic, isn’t it?

  7. Guffawing Gaffer Says:

    And to think, newspapers all over have been missing out on Bill’s sage advice. These ideas have been brandied about for years. Some are okay; some are suicide. If you want a job so bad, just apply.

  8. diane vespa Says:

    just wanted to share that as I was reading this I couldn’t get the “video killed the radio star” song out of my head. Not that it means anything… just thought it was funny.

Trackbacks

  1. Media: State Journal-Register switching Web sites this week » Peoria Pundit
  2. Media: Cosmetic changes coming to PJStar.com » Peoria Pundit
  3. Peoria Pundit » Blog Archive » Media: State Journal-Register switching Web sites this week
  4. Peoria Pundit » Blog Archive » Media: Cosmetic changes coming to PJStar.com