I developed my ideas of what a metropolitan newspaper should beĀ during the 1970s, even beforeĀ I started at the Detroit Free Press as a copyĀ clerkĀ at age 19.Ā Ā
During that time,Ā The Detroit News and Free Press were at each otherās throatsāthe Free Press seeking to become the dominant paper in Michigan and The News doing everything it could to maintain itsĀ circulationĀ lead. Both newspapers were staffed by hard-nosed reporters and management balanced two missions:Ā making a profit withĀ civic responsibility.Ā When those two missions conflicted, the newspapers more often than not came down onĀ the side of their responsibility to report.Ā Ā
Unfortunately,Ā since the mid-1990s, circulation has been slipping and advertisers have fled for the InternetāaĀ sea changeĀ thatĀ has left newspapersĀ nationwideĀ struggling to survive.Ā That one-two punch has forced newspapersĀ to cut staff, which results in a less robust product. As the product weakens, fewer readers see the value in receiving a daily newspaper, which results in lower circulation. Lower circulation numbers result in less income, which results in staff cuts, which accelerates the spiral toward failure.Ā Ā
But it is not all gloom and doomĀ for newspapers, nor should it be. NewĀ business models are being developed that will allowĀ managementĀ to look pastĀ quarterly numbersĀ and profit margins to begin the process ofĀ rebuilding staffs that willĀ provide robust coverage of their communities and ultimately make the News and Free Press relevant again.Ā There are pros and cons to each, but some have distinct advantages if the corporation that owns the Free Press and the hedge fund that owns The News decide thatĀ havingĀ their newspapers serve their community is more important than watching themĀ slowly die.Ā Ā
Here are the options as I see them:Ā
DO MORE TO TAILOR THE NEWS
For years, news was a one-way street. The reporters and editors were the gatekeepers who decided on what was important enough to publish andĀ readersĀ trusted the papersā judgment. If readers objected, theyĀ owned only aĀ few waysĀ of expressing it. They could write a letter to the editor or stop buying the paper. A call to the City Desk complaining about coverage wasĀ usuallyĀ listened to,Ā and promptly dismissed. But with readers having so many choices today, itās critical for aĀ newspaperĀ to provideĀ a product that peopleĀ wantĀ to read.Ā Ā
That people want to read ⦠thereās the catch. Newspapers have always faced a dilemma: Do they give the readers what they say they wantāmore human interest stories (think āhappy newsā) or do they provide the news that people need to know in order to be better-informed citizens (the āgloom and doomā stories that people often complain about and the āboringā news that is the nuts and bolts of democracy)?Ā
The Internet has given readers the ability to communicate directly with reporters and editorsĀ through email and social mediaĀ and indirectly through data collection by the newspapers. The Free Press recently used dataĀ mined from reader āclicksāĀ to help guide them on how to best present a series of stories that compared pick up trucks from Ford, GM, and FCA.Ā Ā
Counting clicks, however,Ā can be a foolāsĀ proposition.Ā Weāve allĀ clicked on a link that takes us to some salacious or bizarre story.Ā Should the newspapersĀ reallyĀ be using those clicks to guide contentĀ they postĀ on their websites?Ā Ā Ā
EMBRACE THE WEB AND CONVERT TO DIGITAL ONLYĀ
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer converted to an online-only publication in 2009. That switch may have eliminatedĀ the cost ofĀ printing and distributing the product, but it doesnāt guarantee online readership willĀ follow the new distribution model. A study byĀ Neil ThurmanāÆandāÆRichard FletcherĀ Ā (10.1177/0956474818798538)Ā showed thatĀ onlineĀ readership of the Independent, a newspaper printed in England, remained flat afterĀ the paper stoppedĀ printingĀ and moved to digital. The Thurman and FletcherĀ research showedĀ print readersĀ wereĀ responsible for 81 percent of all the timeĀ spent consuming the informationĀ produced.Ā Ā
PUT MOST OF YOUR CONTENT BEHIND A PAY WALLĀ
Newspapers, in general,Ā rejected this notion in the early days of the digital revolutionĀ believing thatĀ digital would supplement print andĀ they could sell enough ads online to make digital work.Ā The Wall Street JournalĀ was one of the few newspapers thatĀ decided it would charge customersĀ forĀ access to their information. TheirĀ gamble worked.Ā But this is particular to established print brands, likeĀ The Journal, whichĀ providesĀ highly specialized financial information. ItĀ seems unlikely the Detroit papers would be able to convince readers to buy online subscriptions,Ā especially when there are so many cost-free alternatives.Ā AndĀ other than sports coverage,Ā the papersĀ donāt seem to beĀ specializing inĀ anything muchĀ today.Ā Ā
MERGING OF MEDIA
Not a real solution, but it does buy time. If two media companies combine operations, they can combine business operations that will end up improving the bottom line.āÆĀ
āÆIn a recent piece for the Nieman Lab at Harvard UniversityĀ news industry analyst, Ken Doctor speculates a new round of newspaper mergers is on the horizon. Gannett, the parent company of theĀ Free Press, recently fended off the acquisition attempt of Alden Global Capital, theĀ majority owner of theĀ parent company of the Detroit News. Could Gannett be looking to merge with a white knight that would make it too expensive for Alden? Doctor says merger talk could heat up in mid-May.āÆĀ
FIND A BUY OUT OPTION
Of course, the obvious example is Jeff Bezosā purchase of theĀ Washington Post. (Less well known is the Los Angeles Times, which was purchased by billionaire Patrick Soon-Shlong in 2018.) Under Bezosā leadership, both the newsroom staff and readership have grown. (Donald TrumpāsĀ presidency may have something to do with the increase in readership.) Bezosā ownership so far appears to be benign but there are major concerns. One is the risk of media becomingĀ concentrated in the hands of wealthyĀ individuals (instead of wealthy corporations). WhichĀ brings us to the second concern: Wealthy newspaper owners usingĀ theirĀ platforms to benefit themselves. See: William Randolph Hearst.Ā
SHIFT CONTROL TO A FOUNDATION OR A NON-PROFIT CORPORATIONĀ
ThisĀ modelĀ has gained traction among newspaper idealists.Ā If a newspaper were owned by a foundation or non-profit,Ā the argument goes, it could gather and disseminate the news freed from the need toĀ maintain a margin, let alone make a profit.Ā Some DetroitĀ media platforms are following this model and seeking investment from foundations. This may also be an easy way out for general and generic media coverage.Ā The Tampa Bay Times was the first newspaper in the country to shift to that model; it is owned by The Poynter Center for Media Studies.Ā
FIND ALTERNATE SOURCES OF INCOMEĀ
Some departments at the papers are getting smart. Business development teams are sourcing alternate forms of funding, such as the uber-successful pay to runĀ theĀ DetroitĀ Free PressĀ International Marathon. At nearly 30,000 participants last year, thisĀ isĀ a big moneymaker for the paper. Growth of the Free Press Film Festival mayĀ alsoĀ soonĀ add to the bottom line.Ā Ā
END THE SEPERATION OF EDITORIAL AND ADVERTISING AND MONETIZE CONTENTĀ
This gives anĀ industryĀ curmudgeon like me the willies.Ā Editorial credibility is aĀ newspaperās stock in trade. Would you wonder if an article was skewed if it were sponsored? Would it cause you to pause and consider its veracity?Ā Ā
Every print media/journalism organization that cares about its credibility is struggling with this issue.Ā With advertisers moving away from newspapers and magazines, thoseĀ stillĀ want to be seen in print are now negotiating from a stronger position and are demanding more.Ā To attract advertisers,Ā someĀ media outlets are blurring the lines between advertising andĀ editorial content.Ā Forbes Magazine, for example,Ā has aĀ āBrand Voiceā section in every magazine that allows an advertiser to include an article that promotes their brand, product or service.Ā Many newspaperĀ websitesĀ have done something similar,Ā interspersingĀ ads with their headlines.Ā Ā
That said, if a newspaper goes about it the right way, monetizing content might just be the best way out of this morass for a corporation with a legal responsibility to maximize profits.Ā Ā
OR, MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUOĀ
Itās not a good choice, but doing nothing is still an option. You are facing death. Do you do nothing? Or try to do something else even though you are uncertain of the outcome?Ā Ā Tough call.Ā Ā