We all seem perfectly agreed that the credit crunch has to take most of the blame for the current media crisis, threatening to overthrow the press we’ve become so dependent on over more than a century or so, but didn’t the media’s frantic search for cost reductions really begin years and years ago – some time around last fin-de siècle?
I, for one, still harbour vivid memories of my very first job in the business, an almost 20 year old novice in a provincial Norwegian newspaper, which happened to keel over while I took a leave of absence to serve my compulsory year in The Royal Norwegian Navy. By the time I returned, my working place had ceased to exist, due to an all-too costly investment in print works which far exceeded the newspaper’s own requirements. 27 years have since come to pass, in which the press’ conditions have deteriorated considerably – especially, of course, in the wake of the early to mid-1990′s World Wide Web introduction.
Old copies of The Times with supplements (Wikimedia Commons)
By 1996, most news corporations were dead set on exploiting this new channel for all its worth, regarding it a means to a much different end than the eventual result: An on-line display of the printed editions’ merits, by which subscribers and readers would be recruited in fourscores.
I don’t have to remind you, some 15 years later, that web news became an almost instant success. To such an extent that some newspapers even tried out paid content, only to learn that by then we were already too spoilt to accept anything less than free news. It’s that old Internet proverb all over: Information wants to be free.
They’re all tabloids now
Consequently the media corporations spent more and more on their free of charge outlets on-line, hoping for vast advertisement income following the hugely increased traffic figures, at the cost of ever-declining printed circulation – up to a point where the once so respected broadsheets decided to go for the much more cost-effective tabloid format, ignoring the mere fact that a tabloid format also requires a tabloid-accommodated content. That’s right: A tabloid content (hence the description) – unless, of course, they were prepared to increase the number of pages per story, which again would undermine the measurement’s chief objective; to reduce costs.
We can’t have that in times like these, try as we may – and some really do. As mentioned ad nauseam, The New York Times have decided against quality reductions in order to meet its financial challenges, leaving the entire corporation vulnerable for multiple cases of near-bankruptcy. The UK’s and Ireland’s The Independent needs to raise EUR 200 million to repay debts, which, under the circumstances, is considered a very tough call.
In order to boost circulation figures the press, unfortunately, is forced to provide “news” that’s in demand, which, for modern day citizens happens to be light entertainment, I’m sorry to say.
Serious = Corny
In Norway we see that a modest number of serious and opinionated newspapers have grown, in terms of circulation figures. But we’re talking marginal circulation, compared to our nationals – or some regional dailies, even – however declining. Do you know what we call the serious newspapers in our neck of the woods? Niche papers. That’s right: Niche papers!
Being serious has become something of an oddity best left to the intellectuals, whose gross purchasing power is nowhere near that of the common majority. But who am I to complain, who long since gave up printed news on the altar of the almighty interwoven Interweb. Then again, I have my reasons. Some of the “niche papers” are a tad too pretentious for my taste, to be honest, while the nationals are all about sports, celebrities and… well, light entertainment, creating a void in which the serious general newspapers once used to reside – one that I fear is not about to be filled any time soon.
Following the massacre
As if an acknowledgement of the state of the press isn’t enough, I’ve delved into frequent and depressive tidings of the media’s infinite demise. Actually, keeping tabs on the ongoing massacre has turned into something of an industry in its own right (a development I fear I’m not about to alleviate in any way). Take this little chap – on Twitter, for instance:
— this quote was brought to you by quoteurl
Not to mention The Newspaper Death Watch, of course:
Screendump from The Newspaper Death Watch.
And then there’s people like me (along with legions of concerned journalists and news consumers). A quick look at some of my recent posts on the matter:
- Media crisis: TV news sacrificed
- ePaper — Newsprint’s saviour?
- Online life after newsprintocide
- Schibsted head saves face
- 2009 a turning point for web news
In addition to numerous similar posts in my native tongue. As a freelance journalist, very much dependent on the well-being of our press, I must admit that I’m frequently tempted to shrug it all off with a nonchalant What me worry, while in truth I’m scared stiff. Like most freelancers, I’ve experienced a significant decline in assignments, while payment for those I do get, more often than not requires a lot more persistence than only half a year ago. By all means, I’m not special in that respect. These are all signs of the times, prompting yours truly to take his entire livelihood under serious consideration.
Then again, we’re all pretty close to doomed these days, anyway, regardless the nature of our business. I really never thought it’d come to this, but I’m more than happy for suggestions – like most of my writing brethren, I suppose.
On a lighter note, however:
P.S. Yes! I was indeed tempted to use “Fleet Street from Broadsheet to Spreadsheet” in the headline, but let’s not go completely overboard. After all – and contrary to popular belief, for all I know: This is not a tabloid.
