<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Looks like bad news in Q2 for newspapers and local TV</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/</link>
	<description>Where TV Finds the Future</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:24:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: David Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/#comment-426642</link>
		<dc:creator>David Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:02:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/#comment-426642</guid>
		<description>@hart: all true. the issue at hand is that while online news sites are now raking in dimes instead of pennies, the original ink-and-paper products are still losing dollars. publishers are working overtime to adjust rates and show advertisers value for their buys, but a great deal of online advertising is bought at very low cost and spread over a great many sites by brokers like tacoda, double click, yahoo or google, who are grabbing a healthy chunk of the change that used to all go into the local media property pocket at the end of the day when they were the only show in town, and the town was the only market. the picture now is not so clear or easily defined. 

now adserving companies are attractive buys to marketing companies or agencies like WPP, but most media companies/publishers are outsourcing or partnering for a significant portion of their adserving, verticals, or local search. only a few years ago, the newspaper/broadcaster was an essentially vertical solution for local advertising and marketing with multiple products, in house creative and account management, and a slate of solutions to reach targeted audiences. today, reps and advertising managers have a hard time explaining online, let alone giving a client the customer satisfaction or intelligence they need to effectively manage campaigns and compete against major nationals who have entire departments to figure it out for them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@hart: all true. the issue at hand is that while online news sites are now raking in dimes instead of pennies, the original ink-and-paper products are still losing dollars. publishers are working overtime to adjust rates and show advertisers value for their buys, but a great deal of online advertising is bought at very low cost and spread over a great many sites by brokers like tacoda, double click, yahoo or google, who are grabbing a healthy chunk of the change that used to all go into the local media property pocket at the end of the day when they were the only show in town, and the town was the only market. the picture now is not so clear or easily defined. </p>
<p>now adserving companies are attractive buys to marketing companies or agencies like WPP, but most media companies/publishers are outsourcing or partnering for a significant portion of their adserving, verticals, or local search. only a few years ago, the newspaper/broadcaster was an essentially vertical solution for local advertising and marketing with multiple products, in house creative and account management, and a slate of solutions to reach targeted audiences. today, reps and advertising managers have a hard time explaining online, let alone giving a client the customer satisfaction or intelligence they need to effectively manage campaigns and compete against major nationals who have entire departments to figure it out for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J Jonah Jamison</title>
		<link>http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/#comment-425500</link>
		<dc:creator>J Jonah Jamison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:34:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/#comment-425500</guid>
		<description>...and from all that traffic, newspapers were able to increase revenue enough to provide burled walnut paneling in the offices of select publishers. Staff reductions in the third quarter should also allow for parquet flooring.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;and from all that traffic, newspapers were able to increase revenue enough to provide burled walnut paneling in the offices of select publishers. Staff reductions in the third quarter should also allow for parquet flooring.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hart</title>
		<link>http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/#comment-425360</link>
		<dc:creator>Hart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:11:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lostremote.com/2007/07/25/looks-like-bad-news-in-q2-for-newspapers-and-local-television-owners/#comment-425360</guid>
		<description>But there's also this: “More than 59 million people (37.3 percent of all active Internet users) visited newspaper Web sites on average during the second quarter of 2007, a record number that represents a 7.7 percent increase over the same period a year ago, according to custom analysis provided by Nielsen//NetRatings for the Newspaper Association of America.” And this: “In addition to the numbers cited above, users continue to increase the amount of time they spend on newspaper Web sites. … According to Nielsen, users spent a combined 7.2 billion minutes browsing newspaper Web sites during the second quarter during nearly 1.4 billion total visits.” If you look at the numbers, the time-per-person trend line has climbed steadily since January 2004.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But there&#8217;s also this: “More than 59 million people (37.3 percent of all active Internet users) visited newspaper Web sites on average during the second quarter of 2007, a record number that represents a 7.7 percent increase over the same period a year ago, according to custom analysis provided by Nielsen//NetRatings for the Newspaper Association of America.” And this: “In addition to the numbers cited above, users continue to increase the amount of time they spend on newspaper Web sites. … According to Nielsen, users spent a combined 7.2 billion minutes browsing newspaper Web sites during the second quarter during nearly 1.4 billion total visits.” If you look at the numbers, the time-per-person trend line has climbed steadily since January 2004.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
