“The daily newspaper was a centerpiece of the community; it was how community information was distributed.

Eventually the newspaper was sold. It was no longer a point of civic pride for its owners or a cohesive center point of happenings, involvement and community. It was now an investment.

Along with the other media outlets bought and sold through the years a thirty percent profit was a common mandate. As other sources for information became more popular the circulation began to decline and cuts where made.

The more cuts and consolidations made by the owners, the more the circulation dropped. New owners would offer false hope for their investments, but ultimately shareholders demanded the mandated profits. Reinvestment, other than the occasional redesign, was rare.

Local columns, features and news would be scaled back and replaced with homogenized, syndicated columns, features and entertainment. Circulation continued to drop.”

Read more at NewMediaPhotographer.com

Recommended Posts

2 Comments

  1. It’s sad to hear these stories. However, we are reinventing the wheel in this industry. Not sure what kind of wheel but things are changing fast.

  2. Are we reinventing the wheels, or just casting them aside?

    Certainly the traditional economic model is broken and everything is in a downward catch-22 spiral of content versus financial sustainability, a spiral evident long before the more recent precipitous plunge but surely foreshadowed when more of a premium was placed on commodity over content, shareholders over audience, yada, yada, yada … but on a more basic level, do (most) people even care about local news anymore, or care enough to READ it?

    In the context of available content – specific, specialized content – and the seemingly endless thirst for entertainment and vicarious pursuits, traditional community news is, well, incredibly boring. Is this just a societal shift, a failure of media, or both? Yes.

    But I would also argue that the assertion of profit-motive as the primary driving force for shrinking content, and the subsequent loss of readership preceding increased loss of revenue leading to more bloodletting and so on, is a more recent death throw in a decline that started with shrinking readership nearly four decades ago.

    But, this is such an oversimplification. There are so many reasons for the decline of print but it is always easier to point in one direction – TV news, the internet, greed, etc. – because in the midst of it all there is so little perspective and, simply, because it is all so bloody complex now. I do think it’s clear that print as we have known it, in its mass form for the masses, is quickly dying. I think most would agree with this now. And if you want a good example of the speed of this change then think, how many would have agreed with this just two short years ago?

    Will we even have “news” in the future, or just amalgamated “content,” and if so, from where? All freelancers? Will media conglomerates be nothing more than bureaus of editors and fact checkers? Will we even bother? Whom will we trust? Will this information evolution truly serve individual freedom? I can envision good arguments in opposed directions.

    And it’s not just the news industry that is changing with exponential haste, EVERYTHING is changing with increased rapidity driven on a wave of technological advancement. When, I wonder, will we forget how to manage our own systems?

    In our inexorable rush forward, what exactly are we casting aside here in favor of … what?


Comments are closed for this article!