Closing the Times-Picayune down four days a week
in New Orleans is apparently a smart business move. (Why else would so
many other newspaper chains be following Si Newhouse's lead in
reinterpreting the definition of a daily -- making it the hottest idea
in journalism since the invention of classified ads?) So maybe other
popular sources of information could learn something by following the
Newhouse dictum that three, or less, is enough.
Advance Publications' decision was based on evidence, such as
declining circulation, that except for old fogeys addicted to
Neolithic-age print technology, the public was being better served by
digital and other trendy news sources.
It follows, then, that even more wildly popular sources of
enlightenment, news, and fun in the name of changing habits might
benefit from the Less is Less formulation. TV immediately comes to mind.
Watching television today on TV sets is already irrelevant. Aside
from technonerds who cling to their increasingly supersized, thin, and
expensive TV sets, behavior in TVkind has changed alarmingly over the
past decade. People are leaving a once beloved can't-live-without-it
medium like rats leaving a sinking ship. As you may have noticed, people
watch TV today on their computers, iPads, cellphones... I watch it on
my electric toothbrush. (Have you ever tried it?)
Theoretically, TV is based on giving the public what it wants. With
the occasional exception, the best creative talent money can buy make
shows that invariably fail. It's always the same old sitcom with new
faces and jokes about peeing, same old Law & Order
procedural knockoffs, and Reality TV. The only thing that still works is
live sports, although the masses are starting to feel like asses
overpaying for their Pay-per-View. Even worse, the audience of sheep is
not slavishly absorbing commercial messages any more. It's time for the
industry to find a new business model.
Not much would be lost if TV went dark several days a week, like newspapers.
Going dark works in theatres. When something is good enough to invest
money in, a new production opens. It becomes a major event. If it is
truly what the public wants, not just a schedule stuffer, money pours
in.
Going dark would be TV's major contribution to public health. TV is a
major source of obesity today. Modern programming often seems like a
series of junk food commercials, interrupted by some occasional scenes.
Following the newspaper good citizenship logic, ultimately the medium
that could contribute the most to civilization by switching to a
part-time basis would be the Internet. Why should the Internet be on
24/7?
Look at all the money corporations, to pick one group at random,
would save if The Internet went dark a day or two a week as a starter.
No more surfing by employees in the privacy of their cubicles. No more
checking Facebook (Nasdaq: FB) for important news. No more playing games. No more accidentally stopping on a porn channel or whatever on company time.
And what will eventually replace the Internet? I don't know. Someone will think of something.
Advertising on TV is changing, most product placement and logo
sponosors are the way things are moving as TV moves away from its
traditional formate. Since more viewers are watching either on DVR or on
demand where ads are skipped that medium is quickly becoming useless.
I do think we are moving to an on demand model for TV shows and
movies. If that happens some "networks" and "shows" will disappear
because no one will want to pay for them. However, the cable TV
companies are still clinging to broadcast TV as it is. They need to look
at new business models.
Let me be specific then. Ted, see if you
agree: pompous, arrogant, rude, unwilling to consider alternate points
of view, mean, demeaning, insulting. Did I already say arrogant?
I positively want to thank you Ted, my
friend, for sharing that general and nonspecific negative thought about
me with me. It certainly will help me in my efforts to improve myself to
your liking.
Fred, my boy, you are one of the most
negative people I have ever encountered online. One of these days
if you hava a positive thought to share, I do so hope that you will
share it with me. All good wishes, Ted.
Great! So why not increase income by
raising advertising and subscriptions? If they can't then perhaps they
should cut publication to four times a week and then go out of business
when that fails.
An alternative could be to ask NPR to support them, we know how well that works.
In LA the Times has faced the problem squarely by reducing the font
size and the size of the page. It's gotten so bad that my cockatoo has
to wear reading glasses to know where to aim.
Readership
has declined in the past five years as population in New Orleans fell.
But the residents that remain are loyal readers. In a typical week, The Times-Picayune reaches a majority of adults in all age groups and has great reach among upscale demographic groups.
5 Weekday/1 Sunday Readership • All Adults - 75%
• Adults by Age – Age 18-24: 67% – Age 25-34: 57% – Age 35-44: 71% – Age 45-54: 82% – Age 55+: 85%
• Upscale Demographic Groups – $50,000 - $74,999 Household Income - 81% – $75,000+ Household Income: 77% – Executive/Managerial/Professional: 76% – College Educated: 75% – Home Owners: 78%
Over 4 Sundays, a majority of adults in all age
groups are reached and coverage of upscale demographic groups is equally
impressive.
4 Sunday Readership • All Adults - 72%
• Adults by Age – Age 18-24: 55% – Age 25-34: 61% – Age 35-44: 69% – Age 45-54: 77% – Age 55+: 82%
• Upscale Demographic Groups – $50,000 - $74,999 Household Income - 78% – $75,000+ Household Income: 73% – Executive/Managerial/Professional: 72% – College Educated: 72% – Home Owners: 77%
Scarborough Research October 2010 – September
2011 Jefferson, Orleans, St. Tammany, St. Charles, St. John the Baptist
and St. Bernard Parishes
If I had a publication that was loved by
the readers I would ask my advertisers and readers to pay more and they
surely would. I certainly would not change the daily into something they
for which they are likely to have less love and interest. So I think we
must conclude that either the management is not knowledgable or the
readership is not as much in love as you think.
Perhaps the publisher had just squeezed all
the blood he could from the writers and editors. People in new Orleans
loved that paper and readership was strong.
I wonder if there is any relationship at
all between the success of a medium and the quality of its presentation,
the need if fills or its content. For news outlets I wonder if
longevity has anything to do with its bias or even its outright lying.
Perhaps the New Orleans paper did not fill the bill for content or
perhaps its bias was too obvious.
I wonder, for example, why CNN is dying on the vine and FOX is
flourishing. Could it have anything to do with the fact that FOX, a
conservative outlet, features Bob Beckel a noted liberal hack and Juan
Williams (ditto) while CNN and MSNBC try to get by with a "Conservative"
like David Brooks who is as conservative as the President.
Further, I wonder why Rush Limbaugh is in his 25th year while Bill
Press lasted 1 year in talk radio and even Bill O'Reilly couldn't make a
go of it. Then there's Greta Van Susteren, a former CNN Liberal who
migrated to FOX and is an excellent addition. She is honest, probing and
fair. See what you think of her.
The
blogs and comments posted on Investor Uprising do not reflect the views
of Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, or its sponsors. Investor Uprising,
PRNewswire, and its sponsors do not assume responsibility for any
comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and bloggers. They are no
substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for
trading or any other purpose.
To save this item to
your list of favorite Investor Uprising content so you can find it
later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this
interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to
share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each
service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This