Newspapers Continue To Go Way Of Dinosaurs

[gh]

:-(

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f ... e=business

[MJD]

Actually posted all the numbers yesterday and then deleted the post since it hit a bit too close to home.

1. USA Today, 2,296,335, down 0.59 percent

2. The Wall Street Journal, 2,083,660, down 1.10 percent

3. The New York Times, 1,126,190, up 0.46 percent

4. Los Angeles Times, 843,432, down 3.79 percent

5. New York Daily News, 688,584, down 3.70 percent

6. The Washington Post, 678,779, down 4.09 percent

7. New York Post, 662,681, down 1.74 percent

8. Chicago Tribune, 586,122, down 2.47 percent

9. Houston Chronicle, 521,419, down 6.01 percent

10. The Boston Globe, 414,225, down 8.25 percent

11. The Arizona Republic, 411,043, down 0.54 percent

12. The Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J., 400,092, up 0.01 percent

13. San Francisco Chronicle, 391,681, down 16.4 percent

14. Star Tribune of Minneapolis-St. Paul, 374,528, down 0.26 percent

15. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 362,426, down 8.73 percent

16. The Philadelphia Inquirer, 357,679, down 3.16 percent

17. Detroit Free Press, 341,248, down 2.18 percent

18. The Plain Dealer, Cleveland, 339,055, down 4.46 percent

19. The Oregonian, Portland, 333,515, down 1.24 percent

20. The San Diego Union-Tribune, 314,279, down 6.24 percent.

[tafnut]

13. San Francisco Chronicle, 391,681, down 16.4 percent

SAT IT AIN'T SO! I used to LOVE that paper in college. Herb Caen (sp?) and the green sports section! It wasn't a 'great' paper (like the LA Times, f'rinstance) but ya gotta love its provincialism. The city iself is STILL my all-time fave - it ain't 'San Fran' or 'Frisco' - it's The City!

[bad hammy]

The Chron's rationalization. Maybe someone closer to the biz can tell me if this is just double talk or not.

Chronicle Publisher Frank Vega said the newspaper's circulation declines -- nearly 80,000 weekday papers and just over 73,000 on Sunday -- were owed almost entirely to a deliberate strategy of trimming promotional distributions and giveaways.

"We cut a lot of what you would call unprofitable circulation around the first of the year,'' Vega said. "We made a decision that we want quality, profitable circulation that better serves our advertisers."

[El Toro]

Higher circulation can actually be detrimental to profit. The purchase price doesn't cover print and distributions costs so just pumping more out there for the sake of it doesn't help your bottom line. The only argument for higher circulation is if it generates more advertising. It sounds as though smaller circulation with a more clearly defined audience creates an easier advertising sell and better margins, at least for that paper.

[tandfman]

Actually posted all the numbers yesterday and then deleted the post since it hit a bit too close to home.

1. USA Today, 2,296,335, down 0.59 percent - Now 1,621,917

2. The Wall Street Journal, 2,083,660, down 1.10 percent - Now 1,011,200

3. The New York Times, 1,126,190, up 0.46 percent - Now 483,701

4. Los Angeles Times, 843,432, down 3.79 percent - Now 417,936

5. New York Daily News, 688,584, down 3.70 percent - Now less than 231,000

6. The Washington Post, 678,779, down 4.09 percent - Now 254,739

7. New York Post, 662,681, down 1.74 percent - Now 426,139

8. Chicago Tribune, 586,122, down 2.47 percent - Now 238,103

9. Houston Chronicle, 521,419, down 6.01 percent - Now less than 231,000


10. The Boston Globe, 414,225, down 8.25 percent - Now 230,756 . . .

OMG, it has gotten much, much worse since this. I've updated the top 10 from MJD's post with what Wiki currently sez. (Didn't take the trouble to calculate the percentage decreases, but you can see that they are substantial.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...by_circulation

[Conor Dary]

Times and Post are both doing very well.....

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ne...age-2019-02-06

[NotDutra5]

Times and Post are both doing very well.....

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ne...age-2019-02-06

Is this what the discussion is "really" about though? My take was that it was hard copy newspapers that was being commented on although I may be wrong about that.

I got used to reading online almost overnight and now much prefer it.

[Atticus]

My local fish-wrapper is down to about 20 pages a day, combining the financial and entertainment sections. I just found out that the crossword puzzle, the single most print-necessary part of it - is easily printed, so I may be saving that $90/mo (!!!) expense.

[Conor Dary]

Is this what the discussion is "really" about though? My take was that it was hard copy newspapers that was being commented on although I may be wrong about that.

I got used to reading online almost overnight and now much prefer it.

Yes the digital subscriptions is what I'm talking about....

[tandfman]

I subscribe to three newspapers online, but I get only one of them delivered daily in hard copy.

[lonewolf]

I don't know the circulation numbers but when I lived in OKC 1965-67, The Oklahoman had a substantial morning and evening newspaper... I don't know when I had time to read both. Evening paper had discontinued when I returned in 1972-73. I believe the metropolitan population has doubled since 1965 but the morning paper is now pretty skinny except Sunday....

[tandfman]

Pittsburgh (which has a metropolitan area population nearly 1,000,000 greater than that of OKC), has only one daily newspaper left, and it's no longer a daily--it publishes only 5 days a week.

[lonewolf]

The Oklahoman is owned by the Gaylord family, one of the quietly wealthy families in the US, who own or owned Opry Land, The Broadmoor, a whole passel of TV and radio stations, a chunk of the Thunder and who knows what else... maybe the newspaper is just a hobby.

[tandfman]

The McLatchy Company is discontinuing Saturday print editions. Their newspapers include the Sacramento Bee, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, the Miami Herald, the Kansas City Star, the Charlotte Observer and 2 dozen others.