The continuing decline of newspapers

bmasters1981 said:

What was removed?

Click to expand...

I don't recall it being entire subjects but the amount of commercial copy per page had increased to the point that the average (and unofficial) news page had about one single wide column devoted to a news story. The rest of the page were ads. Additionally, the paper increased in size but the increase was primarily inserts (and more ads).

Actually, the clause for qualifying for the newspaper rate for the postal service is an annual advertising content not exceeding 75% of the content of the paper. I'm not sure the specifics on inserts. I would imagine that would count since the post office goes by weight on everything else (and their is even a weight limit on their priority mail). I've seen small town weeklies where there were maybe 10 to 12 column inches beyond the front page that was all news. A publisher in Colorado where there are plenty of public notices, has news on page one, page 2 ad 3 is Public Notices and page 4 almost all ads (display and classifieds). Then again, it's a small town and there's not a bunch of news anyway.

A local newspaper chain where I live, C&G Newspapers, really must manage that content to a T to qualify for the newspaper rate as they distribute by US Mail and have a high advertising content. They do cover hyper local content well, so it is a win-win for everyone.

It's just a local paper and it wasn't a staff writer, but who could be this careless? This actually appeared in print, or something close to it since I can't check now: "... was built in 1939 probably 1839 check that".

I couldn't very well post this on Winnie Mandela's thread, but The Charlotte Observer took two weeks to write about her death. Oh, wait, that is not an advertising section. That's an entire paper. That must be the paper they've been promising to deliver for two weeks after I didn't get it for some reason when it was new.

Customer service is in another country and no matter what I try to do they refer me to the 800 number or email. The emails have canned responses but I never seem to get actual responses from real managers. Until this week. It all started happening at once. A local person who seems to have some trouble with English emailed me saying she "happened" to see my email. That took at least a week.

I'm surprised they didn't at least carry a wire service blip about it. Granted, it's probably not a big deal to their readers, but it was genuinely newsworthy and I think worth at least a newsline like item in the paper even if it was two sentences.

umfan said:

I'm surprised they didn't at least carry a wire service blip about it. Granted, it's probably not a big deal to their readers, but it was genuinely newsworthy and I think worth at least a newsline like item in the paper even if it was two sentences.

Click to expand...

I was making the point that it took me two weeks to get the paper so what I thought was an old story was a story in an old paper.

I got a call from the company that delivers the paper today, two weeks after I called them. Yes, a separate company delivers the papers. And apparently they're not doing that good a job.

I didn't pick up on that. The Detroit papers only deliver three days a week. Anyone wanting home delivery the other four days has to hire an 'independent contractor' and pay a premium. Did the Charlotte paper just subcontract their delivery or do subscribers need to pay a premium for any delivery? The suburban paper still delivers seven days.

umfan said:

I didn't pick up on that. The Detroit papers only deliver three days a week. Anyone wanting home delivery the other four days has to hire an 'independent contractor' and pay a premium. Did the Charlotte paper just subcontract their delivery or do subscribers need to pay a premium for any delivery? The suburban paper still delivers seven days.

Click to expand...

It seems like a subcontractor. We pay the newspaper when the bill comes. I get a big discount, and a bigger one if I talk to someone. Maybe it's because I've been a subscriber (if my parents are counted) for 43 out of the past 45 years. Those 2 missing years we lived outside the area but continued to buy individual copies. I also told them not to charge me to use the web site because I'm not going to do that.

Today I heard something I've never heard before. A local radio station had the results of last night's high school football games. If they've done that before on Saturday I don't remember it. It was during a commercial break in a syndicated show.

If this is the first time the station has done it, I bet I know why. Last week the newspaper in that town stopped printing on Saturdays (and Mondays), so people now have to wait until Sunday to read the scores in the actual paper.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has announced that they are going to stop publishing a printed
edition on Tuesdays and Saturdays, beginning in October.

Our other local paper, the Tribune-Review, ended all printed editions and went online-only
over a year ago.

If it hasn't been mentioned here, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer went online only some years ago. I read King Features comics on their site. There may be other ways to do that, but when I tried other papers, I had trouble finding older comics if I missed a day.

I've seen half-page announcements in several papers warning of the dire consequences of the tariff on Canadian newsprint. Is the PP-G citing the tariff as a factor in its print cutback, or is this just another result of bad demographics, declining circulation and plummeting interest from advertisers?

CTListener said:

I've seen half-page announcements in several papers warning of the dire consequences of the tariff on Canadian newsprint. Is the PP-G citing the tariff as a factor in its print cutback, or is this just another result of bad demographics, declining circulation and plummeting interest from advertisers?

Click to expand...

No, the claim that tariffs on Canadian newsprint are responsible for this are fake news, attempting to blame Trump for their troubles.

They are doing this because their circulation numbers are in freefall. Their ad revenue has plummeted as online shopping continues to kill brick-and-mortar retail. They have pretty much laid-off any established columnists and talent they'd had (the major component of their cost structure is labor, not newsprint). People below a certain age simply never pick-up or look at a printed newspaper. There are too many sources of news online that don't require you to pay a subscription.

Besides, aren't we all supposed to be using recycled newsprint anyhow?

Actually,I know a few newspaper publishers, primarily in small towns, that publish weeklies. The print cost almost always exceeds the cost of the paper. For example, to print a 8 page broadsheet, 1,000 copies (the minimum a printer will do) the cost is $500. If you have 750 subscribers you divide by $500 to get your cost per paper. Add postage (about 17 or 18 cents on average). The average price is 50 cents at the counter or about 15 cents less than the printing costs among the publishers I know. There's some push back from readers when you exceed 50 cents a copy. Given greater readership means greater ad revenue and a greater percentage of papers sold compared to the cost for the minimum 1,000 press run, it's pretty much the best option. If you think wages are bad in radio, look to print. Most folks are being forced to part-time.

A real example: a community of 3,300 with business sales of $11 million (only those businesses that typically buy advertising) did $28,200 gross in 2015. Of that subscriptions were $8,100. Advertising was $20,200. Average 12 of 72 businesses advertises per issue. Printing costs were $12,500. Postage was about $4,000. Operational costs were about $12,700. Publisher worked for free (reimbursed mileage) and sustained a loss of $1,000 for the year. The prior year the paper had a high school kid making minimum wage working 8 hours a week. They did $32,000 during that year.

Online is killing newspapers. National chain stores are killing newspapers by diminishing the core advertising base local business by reducing sales and profits for mom and pop businesses. National chain stores generally do not place any advertising for single location markets and at best might do an insert. This rate and normally around 15 cents per insert times number of subscribers in county. As a general rule the cost has to be lower than direct mail. Advertisers or shoppers are killing newspapers with the lure of lower cost column inch rates and mailing to every household in a county for example. Many mom and pop businesses don't get the readership of the mailed shopper is minimal and the single location business is spending to reach so many people outside their trade area, it is generally a waste of money. In reality the typical business is clueless about effective and targeted advertising and is easily lured toward bad decisions. For most businesses, especially single location, it is the walk in customer that is their cake and anything else is simply the icing.

b-turner said:

Advertisers or shoppers are killing newspapers with the lure of lower cost column inch rates and mailing to every household in a county for example.

Click to expand...

It's funny to me that people complain about commercials on the radio, but will look through a 10-12 page circular that is nothing but ads. You're right, they're killing newspapers and magazines, because the articles add cost to the advertisers. Meanwhile, the advertisers just want to reach eyeballs, which they can for a lower price with no-content advertising circulars. They're almost totally profit, after you eliminate the printing & distribution. It's like user-generated content for the internet.

FreddyE1977 said:

No, the claim that tariffs on Canadian newsprint are responsible for this are fake news, attempting to blame Trump for their troubles.

Click to expand...

It is not "fake". Given the Pittsburgh paper's size, I would guess the 32% newsprint tariff is costing them around $300,000 a year. That's real money that could pay a bunch of cub reporters.

Now, whether these print cuts would have occurred anyway is a different question. And I agree with your suggestion that these cutbacks probably would have happened, eventually, even in the absence of tariffs.

Besides, aren't we all supposed to be using recycled newsprint anyhow?

Click to expand...

Yes. Newsprint is usually 40-80% recycled material depending on the vendor. That obviously means there is fresh paper pulp in each batch. The recycled stuff is made in Canada, too.

PTBoardOp94 said:

Given the Pittsburgh paper's size, I would guess the 32% newsprint tariff is costing them around $300,000 a year. That's real money that could pay a bunch of cub reporters.

Click to expand...

I am guessing you have not seen the size of the P-G in recent years. It's not what you remember.
Some of the local freebie handouts filled with ads are actually bigger on certain days.

The only "fake news" here is that cub reporters get paid.
Lincoln freed the slaves. He didn't say anything about no danged interns.

DavidEduardo said:

Except that a significant portion of those ad circulars get thrown away right at the point of delivery.

At two homes we have lived at, the neighborhood mail box cluster featured a trash bin. It was always filled with the circulars and I seldom saw a neighbor who did not put the big weekly circular straight into the trash.

Click to expand...

The paper I used to work for has been publishing an ad circular for years that's cleverly disguised as a newspaper. It lays out a front page and five other pages with feature stories reprinted from the previous week's editions of the daily paper, then wraps this mini-paper around a load of advertising inserts. Since this thing goes to every address in the circulation area, and most of those people don't read the daily anymore, I wonder if this strategy succeeds in grabbing the attention of folks who would otherwise throw out a "shopper" with an interesting feature or two. At least then, they might thumb through the inserts and see something they want to buy.