It is understandable, but not forgivable, that business reporters at Old Media newspapers might think that the economy is in bad shape. They first have to get past how poorly most of their employers are doing. The industry as a whole has not been doing well, and it's been that way for quite some time.
This table illustrates that point (September 30, 2007 figures are at this post, which originally came from this Editor & Publisher article, which will soon disappear behind its firewall; March 31, 2005 figures were estimated in reverse using annual percentage changes reported as of March 31, 2006, because older data I thought would remain available no longer is):
Daily circulation at the top 20 US newspapers as of September 30 is down 7.6% from 2-1/2 years ago. USA Today is the only paper that has increased its circulation. Excluding USA Today and the Wall Street Journal, which have mostly held their own, the remaining 18 in the top 20 have dropped by 10.6%. I believe that there's less than meets to the eye to the drop at the WSJ, because the publication has many online subscribers who do not receive the print edition.
I did not do a Sunday comparison, but the situation appears to be just as bad, if not worse. For example, the New York Times's Sunday circulation declined over 7% in just the past year.
The one near-exception to the carnage in the non-WSJ-USAT 18 is the New York Post, which has dropped less than 2% in the past 2-1/2 years, and actually has has several periods of increasing circulation during that time.
Please don't tell me that bias, errors of omission, and errors of commission have nothing to do with the steep declines at the other 17, and that it's all because of the Internet -- especially at the papers having percentage declines that go well into double digits.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Interesting Tom
November 8, 2007 - 18:34 ET by acumenPlease don't tell me that bias, errors of omission, and errors of commission have nothing to do with the steep declines at the other 17, and that it's all because of the Internet...
The publications & data provided certainly seem to support your observation Tom. It staggers the mind to believe the NY Times still has a circulation of over 1 million. Who knew there were that many bird cages in America?
Curious numerical variance by the WSJ, NY Post and USAT as compared to the data from the other publications shown. Any numbers provided on The Washington Times? I would have thought based on the quality of material The Washington Times had a circulation of at least 300K.
It would be interesting to compare numbers from other major newspapers that don't lean so heavily to the left but I'm having difficulty thinking of any. That in itself is interesting.
Birds are cool!!
November 8, 2007 - 19:15 ET by general companyWho knew there were that many bird cages in America?
I have to admit we have one, but we use the local rag,,,,honest
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
gc....birds are cool!
November 8, 2007 - 19:24 ET by BlondeNot to derail this thread, but you must watch this video if you're a bird fan.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
WashTimes
November 8, 2007 - 19:24 ET by Tom BlumerAccording to Wiki, WashTimes is not much over 100,000.
Thanks Tom.
November 8, 2007 - 22:40 ET by acumenThanks Tom.
acumen,
November 9, 2007 - 21:35 ET by Dave RWho knew there were that many bird cages in America?
LOL-Don't forget the seafood shops in New York City.
Cut costs---
November 8, 2007 - 18:52 ET by misterbillCut costs--get profits up--HOW??? Easy -fire every conservative reporter. We can get rid of Wooten in Atlanta, Jacoby in Boston and on and on.
Oh--you don't think it's them????
Well , neither do I.
In all fairness, I will say that the horribly biased people on the AJC do appear on the opinion page. Cynthia Tucker, the most prejudiced race-baiter in America-- (Pulitzer winner).
Mike Luckovick(?)--nastiest cartoonist(??) in America (pulitzer).
Mike King--Mister amnesty himself--wonder how he would feel if he lost his job to an illegal immigrant. He once pointed out to me that illegal entry is a "civil" crime , not criminal. Oh boy, tell that to all the unemployed and the rape victims and the dead. Way to go Mike!! Get real--wake up.
Now here's where I am contradictory--I get the AJC every day--why??--best darned sports coverage in the Atlanta area.
If my local newspaper had a better sports section--I would drop the Journal like a hot potato.
Do you have any data on how
November 8, 2007 - 19:07 ET by Heather RadishDo you have any data on how the USA Today circulation numbers would look if they only include people who intentionally purchase their paper (i.e., subtract all the copies people find outside their hotel rooms whether they want one or not)?
Good ? Heather
November 8, 2007 - 19:13 ET by acumenGood question Heather. I would be interested in knowing the answer to that myself.
When I was in Boulder Co
November 8, 2007 - 19:25 ET by general companyWhen I was in Boulder Co and Boston recently, the hotels drop the local paper on your stoop. I picked it up everyday walked to the lobby and dropped it in the trash completely unfettered. I was asked for it one day, I told her it was broken and threw it away and walked away. Yea, I am terminally sarcastic.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
USAT
November 8, 2007 - 19:30 ET by Tom BlumerI don't know how many copies are hotel v. newstand v. home delivery, but I think discounting the hotel trade is a mistake. The one thing I notice about USAT is that if it's up against a local paper in a given hotel, the guests will reach for the USAT at least 80% of the time. If the WSJ is also available, it's about 50-50 with USAT, and the local paper might as well not exist.
Actually the circulation of
November 8, 2007 - 23:06 ET by Right2thePointActually the circulation of the dead tree editions are worse than these figures indicate.
It is not well known because the announcement was so low profile, but this is the first report where they changed how they calculate the numbers.
But for the first time you can also roll up internet reach with the newspapers’ physical
circulation. The idea is for advertisers to look at combined reach
instead of dwelling on the dying side of the business (they’re
combining numbers from Nielsen/Netratings, Comscore, Omniture and
Scaraborough). You need to go here
and register to pull a report, and dissecting the numbers isn’t
immediately obvious (can you really equate a unique user with a
subscriber?) And as a result, I haven’t found any reporting so far that
can say if the New York Times, for example, experienced a net gain or
loss if you add their internet growth. But the extra data is a big step
in the right direction.
RT2P
November 9, 2007 - 10:02 ET by Tom BlumerI think the circ numbers themselves are still "clean." We may not ever see such clean numbers again, if they decide to "integrate" into stats that can't be traced.
I have signed up and looked at the info, and as far as I'm concerned, they are intent on keeping circ numbers low-profile, maybe even hidden. Did you find any pure circ #s there? I didn't.
Thx for the info.
BUT
November 9, 2007 - 10:45 ET by Tom BlumerIn reviewing what I did, I realized that the Dallas Morning News wasn't listed in March of 2006, and I believe it's because there was a circ scandal there. I added a note that DMN isn't in there, and I also resorted the list, which for some reason (like error between the operator and the keyboard) got out of order (the numbers have always been right, but the 1-20 order wasn't correct; now it is). Both are duly noted above.
Tom You can download a
November 8, 2007 - 23:18 ET by Right2thePointTom
You can download a spreadsheet of the top 100 newspaper website visitor statistics here
http://www.naa.org/T...
The Comical
November 9, 2007 - 05:30 ET by UnsaneI'll be buying copies of the Houston Comical soon. I need wrapping paper for my move.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.