Tag Archives: newspapers

Is the advertising pie big enough?

Posted on by

I’ve wondered about this but not as thoughtfully as Ben Compaine, who posts on the Rebuilding Media blog:

Can the media survive on advertising? Lots of folks are counting on it. Broadcasters have always had this single revenue stream. Daily newspapers get about 80% of revenue from advertising and the hot print properties, such as the give-away Metro dailies, depend about 100% on advertising. Now much of the Web is counting on advertising: Google, Yahoo! and increasingly AOL to name just a few of the biggies.

Either the pie gets bigger or somebody gets a smaller slice.

Online salaries higher than in other media

Posted on by

Online publishing salaries of recent graduates are higher than broadcast or print media salaries, according to the 2004 Annual Survey of Journalism and Mass Communication Graduates (PDF) conducted by The University of Georgia’s James M. Cox Jr. Center for International Mass Communication Training and Research.

The survey found that the median online publishing salary in 2004 was $32,000. By comparison, the median salary for TV was $23,492; for cable TV was $30,000; for daily newspapers was $26,000; for weekly newspapers was $24,000; for radio was $23,000; and for consumer magazines was $27,000. [CyberJournalist.net]

Of all the challenges facing my beloved radio these days, that median salary of $23,000 might be the most frightening.

Radio “schedule integrity”

Posted on by
Reply

“Compared to other media, spot radio ranked No. 8 and network radio ranked No. 10 in schedule integrity behind magazines, newspapers, network TV, spot TV, outdoor, syndicated TV, cable TV and Internet. Agencies and advertisers also had less confidence in the accuracy and timeliness of radio affidavits to prove ads ran as ordered than in the affidavits from network TV, spot TV and newspapers.” [Mediaweek story]

From Radio Advertising Bureau’s annual perceptual study (funded by Arbitron):

Mainstream media suffers from “freedom envy”

Posted on by
Reply

Peggy Noonan (WSJ.com) wonders if mainstream media suffers from “freedom envy” where bloggers are concerned:

Bloggers have an institutional advantage in terms of technology and form. They can post immediately. The items they post can be as long or short as they judge to be necessary. Breaking news can be one sentence long: “Malkin gets Barney Frank earwitness report.” In newspapers you have to go to the editor, explain to him why the paper should have another piece on the Eason Jordan affair, spend a day reporting it, only to find that all that’s new today is that reporter Michelle Malkin got an interview with Barney Frank. That’s not enough to merit 10 inches of newspaper space, so the Times doesn’t carry what the blogosphere had 24 hours ago.

This is a really good piece on blogging that –once upon a time– I might have forwarded to the reporters working in our newsrooms. I’ve stopped doing that. With one or two execeptions, our reporters are clueless and/or threatened by the whole notion of blogging. Don’t get it. Don’t want to get it.

Rollin’ my own.

Posted on by
Reply

I never read local newspapers. I know, I know. I’m just not interested no matter how much I should be. As a result, I’ve been reading USA TODAY for years. I could barely get through breakfast without something to read and USA TODAY was my paper of choice. No longer. The bump to seventy-five cents is part of it but there are too many stories I don’t care about. (Yes, I know I should care about them, but I don’t) So I’m reading less of the paper and paying more.

But recently I’ve been surfing with my finger on the print key. In five or ten minutes I have more than enough stories to get me through my Malt-o-Meal. Sort editing my own newspaper. And this process will get more automated but I enjoy browsing and printing and will probable keep rolling my own daily. And I’m saving almost $200 a year.

This Internet thing.

Posted on by

NYU economics professor Nicholas Economides describes the Internet (35 years old in September) in terms of the industries it’s displacing. The U. S. Postal Service is becoming obsolete. In the last five years, more than one out of every 10 radio listeners between the ages of 25 and 34 have stopped listening (Clear Channel, Citadel and Cumulus Media have seen share prices drop 23%, 40% and 26% respectively in the last year). Newspapers have watched revenue from help-wanted ads plummet by more than $3.7 billion in the last five years. And telephone service is almost certain to see some big heavy changes.

What are the choices again?

Posted on by
Reply

A new study for the Online Publishers Association asked: If you could choose only two media, what would they be? The Internet ranked No. 1, chosen as first (45.6 percent) or second (32.1 percent) by 77.7 percent of those surveyed. Television ranked No. 2, with 52.4 percent making it a first or second choice, trailed by books (18.5) and radio (12.9). Only 9.2 percent would choose newspapers in that media mix, and only 3.2 percent made newspapers a first choice.[E-Media Tidbits]

All the news, all the time.

Posted on by
Reply

According to CyberJournalist, Google News beat out BBC News Online, MSNBC.com, Poynter’s Romenesko and allAfrica.com to win 2003 Webby Award for best news site. I’d sure like to be a fly on the wall at AP headquarters. I spent a few (pre-Web) years trying to develop and market an “alternative (to AP) wire service.” All of the news and information was “out there.” And there was no shortage of radio stations (our target market) hungry for the information. The challenge was connecting all the dots. We had a big old expensive satellite channel to move the information one way and we busted our hump to “aggragate” (I always liked that word) the information. But people just didn’t want to pay for information. At least, not very much. Fast forward a few years and damned near every newspaper in the world is putting some or all of their stuff online.

The big record labels tell me that although I paid for my copy of the Metallica CD, I can’t rip the songs to a CD and give it to a friend. While they might win this one, keeping me from sending a copy of today’s big news story to five friends (who each send it to five friends).

I always thought the most important part of the Associated Press wasn’t it’s reporters and editors but the “connectedness” of all those newspapers. A way for them to share the news they gathered. Can we agree that has changed forever?

Cursor-cursed funeral parlors.

Posted on by
Reply

“Today’s sorry newsrooms–silent, smokeless, boozeless, cursor-cursed funeral parlors–bear no resemblance to the divine hell-holes that persisted at newspapers and wire services until the mid-1970s. They were seas of grunge and debris…a universe of controlled chaos, suspended in a perpetual stinking fog of cigarette smoke and worse.”

— Diana McLellan, journalist, former gossip columnist, and longtime Washington editor of Washingtonian magazine