The answer relates to the format for future newspapers. Obviously there is a need for a portable news format. Upon the advent of instantaneous news sources such as radio, television and internet, newspapers and magazines have furnished in-depth digests to supplement the bite-size portions fed via electronics. The internet offers depth, but emphasizes public feedback and opinion.
The strong points for newsprint center on local-identity, portability and habit. Although I see people taking coffee breaks with laptops instead of a paper, those who do so are in the minority. They could be on the cutting edge!
Advertizers will remain dedicated to newspapers until a viable alternative to display ads and coupon desemination is invented. Maybe that is the role for pennysavers- can't say for sure.
One other issue that may have eroded in these cynical times- trust. It used to be that what you read in the paper was taken as fact. Editorial veracity has been brought into question by politics and the urgency of sensationalism. Those born prior to 1950 tend to cling more desperately to the notion that the American press is predicated on honesty. Nowadays, the truism seems to be- it didn't happen unless you read it in the paper. Therein lies the premise to support the supermarket tabloids. (did you hear the groan?)
And for the truly cynical- without newsprint, what will one line the birdcage with? (That line is as dated as the Rochester Times-Union.)
Maybe the downfall of these newspapers is that people feel every paper slants the news a certain way.Coverage for Obama was more positive then for McCain....Plus the cost of the paper.The D and C in rochester cost the same as the Daily News.The D and C has more news in it....The Daily doubles there price for the Sat paper.Is it worth it for a bunch of ads...None of these papers seems to want to try to lower there prices to see if more people would buy it..Go back and read a issue of the Batavia Daily news from the 50's or 60'..More pages ,more news.The print was alot smaller because there was so much more content..and alot cheaper...
They should go back to reporting the news not trying to make the news.
More and more people will get
More and more people will get their news online.But the classic print paper will always be there for those that enjoy it
Hmm.
<a href="http://www.buffalonews.com/145/story/517848.html">Hmm.</a>
The answer relates to the
The answer relates to the format for future newspapers. Obviously there is a need for a portable news format. Upon the advent of instantaneous news sources such as radio, television and internet, newspapers and magazines have furnished in-depth digests to supplement the bite-size portions fed via electronics. The internet offers depth, but emphasizes public feedback and opinion.
The strong points for newsprint center on local-identity, portability and habit. Although I see people taking coffee breaks with laptops instead of a paper, those who do so are in the minority. They could be on the cutting edge!
Advertizers will remain dedicated to newspapers until a viable alternative to display ads and coupon desemination is invented. Maybe that is the role for pennysavers- can't say for sure.
One other issue that may have eroded in these cynical times- trust. It used to be that what you read in the paper was taken as fact. Editorial veracity has been brought into question by politics and the urgency of sensationalism. Those born prior to 1950 tend to cling more desperately to the notion that the American press is predicated on honesty. Nowadays, the truism seems to be- it didn't happen unless you read it in the paper. Therein lies the premise to support the supermarket tabloids. (did you hear the groan?)
And for the truly cynical- without newsprint, what will one line the birdcage with? (That line is as dated as the Rochester Times-Union.)
NY Times in trouble -
<a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/new-york-times-warns-challenging/…{2D22C1CF-93F8-47AC-827C-899FB4782A64}&dist=msr_25">NY Times in trouble - borrowing as much as 225 million against their NY headquarters building</a>
Maybe the downfall of these
Maybe the downfall of these newspapers is that people feel every paper slants the news a certain way.Coverage for Obama was more positive then for McCain....Plus the cost of the paper.The D and C in rochester cost the same as the Daily News.The D and C has more news in it....The Daily doubles there price for the Sat paper.Is it worth it for a bunch of ads...None of these papers seems to want to try to lower there prices to see if more people would buy it..Go back and read a issue of the Batavia Daily news from the 50's or 60'..More pages ,more news.The print was alot smaller because there was so much more content..and alot cheaper...
They should go back to reporting the news not trying to make the news.