Comments on: New York Times Transitioning to Web Only

By: One Hand Clapping » Blog Archive » New York Times to fold?

One Hand Clapping » Blog Archive » New York Times to fold? — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 19:40:36 +0000

[...] Well, not exactly - only papers made of, well, paper can fold. But it seems that New York Times chairman Arthur Sulzberger told the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, “I really don’t know whether we’ll be printing the Times in five years… .” He went on to say that the news outlet will likely move entirely onto the internet. James Joyner has details, including this rejoinder to Pinch’s declaration that the Times’ web site will charge readers to read: “Then the New York Times will exist only as a niche paper. Slate, Salon, and others have tried and failed going the subscription-only route.” [...]

By: ProfessorBainbridge.com ®

ProfessorBainbridge.com ® — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 12:21:10 +0000

Paying for Online Newspapers...

James Joyner opines:Slate, Salon, and others have tried and failed going the subscription-only route. There’s simply too much good content out there that’ openly accessible. Just as with the print editions now, newspapers will need to figure out ho...

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 01:06:57 +0000

YAJ - Actually, the Post does quite well against the Times at the newstands. Their tablod format, its populist writing, and sports coverage, plus its afternoon late editions, are very popular. The prime readership, the working class NYers, don't really read the editorial page.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:46:31 +0000

DC Loser,

The point I am making is that they are reaching such a small portion of their audience already. I think it speaks of a problem with the print media in general, so comparing them to other walking wounded is problematic.

The New York Post is a fair comparison, and I suspect their editorial stance in a blue state speaks more to the relative numbers than anything else.

WSJ is much more than a New York paper (though obviously the financial community on Wall Street is an important consideration). Likewise, the USA today is an example of a paper being truly national.

The Washington Post is an interesting comparison. I'm not to keen on their editorial stance, but I hold them in higher regard than the NYT. They do about 650K circulation out of a 5 million metropolitan population or 13% (not great but not bad). Admittedly the area probably has a higher news junky ratio than anywhere else in the country.

The LAT pulls 850K out a 13 million metropolitan area or about 6.5% (half the post). Compare this to the NYT pulling 5.9% of their metropolitan area. And the NYT is getting more out of area subscriptions I bet than the Washington Post or the LAT.

By: Edgardo

Edgardo — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:32:10 +0000

I'd like to know how many of 1.1 million papers are distributed freely to college students.

By: Don Surber » Blog Archive » The Pinch line

Don Surber » Blog Archive » The Pinch line — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:43:44 +0000

[...] UPDATE: James Joyner at Outside the Beltway thinks I was a little harsh on NYT. Probably. AP too. It is just that I expect better from those who should be the industry’s leaders. BTW, I think NYT will have a print version for a long while. [...]

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:39:43 +0000

YAJ - While the 1.1 million print circulation might seem small, the NYT is the 3rd largest paper in the country, right behind USA Today and the WSJ. By comparison, the NY Daily News and the Post have numbers slightly above 700k. The WaPo's numbers are about 930k. Most other "major" papers are lucky to be over 500k.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:37:03 +0000

So they are already at a tipping point. 1.5 million on line and 1.1 million in print. And this for a "national" paper. With a population of over 8 million in the city and nearly 19 million in the metropolitan ares, plus they advertise on TV to deliver it here in Texas, they sell only 1.1 million print copies. And I use the word sell generously as noted in the comments above.

Why do I get the feeling if the right stopped using them as a punching bag they would fade like Air America.

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:00:29 +0000

James - I am a product of the NYC school system. Back in the day, we received the NY Times in middle school and were taught how to fold the paper in the correct way to read it on the subway. I'll admit most of the subway hoi polli have copies of the Daily News or the Post, but there are plenty of folks who do read the Times or the WSJ on the trains.

By: Edgardo

Edgardo — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:53:02 +0000

Last October I visited U. of Nevada, Reno, and at the library hall I could see several piles of NYT to be distributed freely to students. By lunch time the piles were still large. What a waste of paper!
There is no free riding problem here. The paper edition is mainly to provide commercial information about products and companies will find other effective ways to provide this information (initially a little more expensive). The same applies to occasional, noncommercial information. The news in paper editions are largely provided by news agencies that have already been providing them through TV, radio and other means. And finally the so-called analysis of news (99% of what appears as "only" news in NYT) has already been competing with (and increasingly losing to) the analysis provided by many others in Internet. So the end of the paper edition will affect only a few people that used to read it in their way to office or back home; soon they will find there are other things to read much better than the NYT.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:14:07 +0000

So if people are not willing to pay for the NYT, or others who is going to pay for news collection? Plenty of Web enterprises subsist with advertising. So, too, does CNN, Fox News, and others. What are the NYC commuters going to read on the subway? That thought occurred to me as well. Likely not the NYT, though, since they insist on keeping the antiquated broadsheet format. That's hard enough to read on one's couch, let alone on a crowded subway. You'll note that the "Express" is a tabloid.

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:51:23 +0000

What are the NYC commuters going to read on the subway? The NY papers make a good amount of their money from the commuter crowd. This is something people often overlook if they don't live in NY. The Time could of course set up free giveaway papers like the Post does in DC with the "Express" papers they hand out at Metro stations, and make the money off the advertisers.

By: spencer

spencer — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:22:02 +0000

We still have a massive free rider problem.

The NYT and others pay for the collection of news and the rest of the web free rides on this.

WE have a basic problem that want ads cross subsidized the collection of news and nothing has emerged to replace this.

So if people are not willing to pay for the NYT, or others who is going to pay for news collection?

By: M. Murcek

M. Murcek — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 14:56:01 +0000

Impossible to see how the pressmen's union is going to like this.

By: A great resource directory

A great resource directory — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

s message features 13 press snippets about Pelosi and the plane — including six from the Washington Times and one each from Tucker Carlson, Fox News and Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post. So is this a case where New York Times Transitioning to Web Only Outside Beltway - The New York Post is a fair comparison, and I suspect their editorial stance in a blue state speaks more to the relative numbers than anything else. WSJ is much more than a New York paper (though obviously the financial community on