This week, AP executive editor Kathleen Carroll told the Poynter group that newspapers would most suffer online in their break from the AP. With up to the minute news wire and rich new AP video content, newspapers greatly benefit from AP material on their websites.
It makes sense to me. It would cost news organizations a fortune to match the variety and quality of AP video releases- straining an already burdened news industry.
The article went on to explain that the AP is finding more profit in media other than newspapers. Carroll explained that "with international markets growing and broadcast and online clients ready for an extended report," the AP doesn't have to cut prices on their services to newspapers. They are doing just fine.
This is yet another indication that newspapers are fading out. The AP is making their money more and more off of new media. Considering that the AP is owned by newspapers, it seems as though there may be a conflict of interest there.
Interestingly, the article also listed profit projections from ad revenue. According to Goldman Sach's estimate, newspapers can expect to see profits drop by almost $7 billion in four years. That's a ton of money without adjusting for inflation.
It seems like all signs point to the downfall of the modern newspaper. Is all of this like watching the Titanic go down, commenting until it touches bottom? Your comments please.
2 comments:
Well, because you said please:
The Hidenburg, the Titanic, the newspaper - they're all one in the same as far as I'm concerned. But what do we lose exactly? Our basis for at least an attempt at objective news writing? Or a bunch of hand-staining loose-leaf?
Is this why you don't have a major, because your love is a dying industry? Evolve with it. I hate the ink that gets on your fingers... =)
Titanic...such a sad story...
Post a Comment