Today's report of circulation stats dropping for nearly every major paper in the country (notable exceptions: the New York Post and the Washington Times) is terrible for the newspaper industry. The worse news is that a) nobody is completely sure what's causing it and b) nobody is sure at all how to reverse it.
Hugh Hewitt had this to say:
Nothing wrong there at all, is there? Great product by unbiased reporters enjoying the trust and confidence of the public, right?
Hmm. I'd sooner point to:
- a general decline in American reading habits
- 24-hour cable news rendering the one-a-day news cycle obsolete
- the graying of the newspaper audience
- online newspaper content available for free
- the inability and unwillingness for large papers to be truly local
- and competing forms of information/entertainment (blogs, videogames, YouTube, talk radio, etc.)
Ungreat product by biased reporters is, I think, the least of newspapers' worries. In any case, I wonder how anyone can blame reporters for falling circulation. Making the money isn't (and shouldn't be) their business--it's the job of the men (and a few women) upstairs.
Blaming reporters for falling circ is like blaming flight attendants for bankrupt airlines. And I'm sure some people have done that as well.
Comments