3 Comments Add your own

• 1. Rick Ellis  |  August 18th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

  One of the challenges faced by newspapers is that the average salesperson understands even less about selling online than most TV web sites. They don’t have a sense of how to highlight the strengths of their sites, and because so many of the sales they do get are package deals (print/online/other), when their core revenue drops, so does their online revenue.

• 2. Roy Vincent  |  August 18th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

  I called them pikers, and have continued to do so over newspapers since. Berlin brandenburg gate So that was a totally random way to start newspapers about some local TV sites, but o well. Package deals was a really difficult because i liked it here soo much.

• 3. Rod Overton  |  August 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

  I’ll agree with the assessments of sales issues concerning the problem, but I also think fundamental issues surrounding print content are finally making an impact online…. (I’ll just brace now for the assault that will follow my post…)

  1) We’re seeing TONS more print folks — at last — moving over to online (or at least “seeing the light” and contributing in real ways). While this is “good” overall in theory — they are finally getting aboard (or pretending to) — it is hard to absorb their usually bad ideas or stonewalling on ideas that would help.
  These ideas are ones those of us who have been in the business of online journalism for 10+ years have figured out don’t work well or are not worth the time/effort/ROI. Or, they are ideas that we know would be successful, but we need print newsroom help with executing.
  We’re losing the battle against the influx of more print people running or heavily influencing the online products.
  It’s showing or we wouldn’t be seeing even more “webcasts” from newspapers after these have been shown not to be successful. It’s showing or I would not have had to argue with a print managing editor about writing a story about American Idol making a stop in our flagship newspaper’s town. (There are many more examples.. )

  2) The overall print product content is having more of an impact on the online product because less “online only” content is produced than years before. I can’t really measure this, but the print newsrooms are being engaged to contribute to the web more — at the expense of pure online journalists. What does this mean? Simply put, it means the print product news judgment is being leaned on more than in the past.
  This is news judgment that is firmly based on the “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable” logic that actually (if you think through it) makes most of our readers (or hopeful readers) “comfortable” and, thus, the “target” of our print Journalists (capital J intended).
  Online journalists for newspaper sites are typically more concerned with growing an audience and thinking like TV people — sort of the way ratings can help *guide* news judgment.
  As the online journalists get less say in what happens, the focus goes back to “traditional” print thinking of news judgment, which effectively drives away our readers and potential readers.

  This most recent integration of print folks to online is much like a snake (online) trying to eat/digest a large animal (print) — I hope. That is to say that it would be nice if the animal gets digested soon (although not destoryed — that’s not what I am saying) and things can get back to making sense.

  I’ve seen and read many audience and visitor reports lately for newspaper sites and the overall traffic growth and visitors — compared to TV sites — has slowed significantly (in some cases the growth has just stopped). I can’t help but think this is very much associated with content aspects. This then, I believe, all trickles down to sales and revenue efforts. (How can you grow revenue if your audience online has stopped growing?)

  I will now duck to get out of the way of flying objects…

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed