Yes. Printed papers are dying but digital newspapers have a future.
5% (79 votes)
No. The online-only publication won't generate enough advertising revenue to succeed long-term.
21% (375 votes)
No. The problem is the paper's liberal bias alienating readers, eroding profitability.
71% (1242 votes)
Yes. But that doesn't mean digital conversion will work if/when other newspapers try it.
3% (51 votes)
Total votes: 1747
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Oh yes yes yes.
March 17, 2009 - 10:01 ET by JWFI always read the online newspapers when I do my business in the "library".
Odd though. The missus won't touch my laptop.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
I voted No. The problem is
March 17, 2009 - 10:13 ET by Dan The Man 2I voted No. The problem is the paper's liberal bias alienating readers, eroding profitability
I believe the paper died because of its readership and lack of advertising revenue coming in. The company will expect a certain amount of profit to come from an online venture and it will fail because the leftist bent will continue and there is plenty of online content to satisfy that crowd. A paper has to have some local content to survive and it needs to be relevant to the community.
And it died because it alienated its local readers, well enough to be unprofitable to a big company so it will not generate enough revenue to stay profitable.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Not sure of the question
March 17, 2009 - 10:29 ET by HelenSI'm not totally clear on what the question means. Will they succeed in going belly-up as a print media? Yes. Will they succeed in going to a web-only format? Yes again. Will they succeed as a media source in their new format? Probably not. In fact, it is my suspicion that they will sink into obscurity because they will only be seen, now, if someone WANTS to see them, seeks them out. They won't be in front of stores or restaurants or bus stops anymore.
So I suspect that they will not be a lucrative business for much longer as they have some pretty stiff online competition and I doubt they can hold up to the likes of NewsBusters, Drudge, NYPost, and a few other useful and actually informative sites.
Me - "The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years - the cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil."
lefties don't pay
March 17, 2009 - 10:30 ET by wizardjrPart of the American leftist paradigm is not paying for anything, so even if this rag really appealed to leftist readers, there would be no profit.
I can't wait until Barry funds newspapers from the Federal coffers. I mean, it's only fair.
"Things is gonna change. We got us Obama now!"
No...
March 17, 2009 - 10:32 ET by heldmywTheir product is unremarkable, and the internet is filled with lefty sites that offer more red meat to their denizens.
The carcass of the P-I will molder for a bit, as the reporters try to find a niche that pays, but they will ultimately fail. Their appeal will be too small, and advertisers can target their audiences with much greater specificity and impact elsewhere.
The day of the printing-press newspaper is over. Journalism will survive, but hack outfits like the P-I don't offer anything special.
They're Doomed.
What is success?
March 17, 2009 - 10:39 ET by slickwillie2001Papers like this one start out by discounting half of their potential customers. Any business that does that places themself at a huge disadvantage. Before the intertubes were discovered they could get away with it. Now they can't, and they simply have not adapted. Good riddance.
Can they succeed? Depends what 'success' is. I'm sure they can build a website that people will go to, but it will be a tiny business in terms of employees, revenue, costs, etc, compared to the old newspaper.
X I have no
March 17, 2009 - 11:08 ET by Chris NormanX I have no idea
Although, even if people do read an occasional story on-line that they specifically look up, I suspect that the daily reading of the newspaper, cover to cover, is a ritual and a habit that has gone away for most, along with eating a full nourishing breakfast at the table every morning served by Donna Reed.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
→ I voted no.
March 17, 2009 - 11:11 ET by Cool ArrowSelling subscriptions and ad space (especially local) is tough.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
I voted no because of
March 17, 2009 - 11:20 ET by oldArmyI voted no because of "long-term revenue issues" I think people have such a vast amount of options already for whatever they are looking for on the internet for news coverage. They are getting into the game late. Especially if they try and make their sites Pay sites.
All biased news should go the same way
March 17, 2009 - 14:48 ET by kevinm13This is one of many failures that will occur in the near future with the liberal biased media. Katey Couric has bad ratings because she is so biased. The papers are all liberal bastions and are all losing subscribers. In NJ where I live, the biggest paper is the Newark Star Ledger. It is on its last legs and just increased the price of the paper at the newsstand. I think it is 75 cents M-F, a buck on Saturdays and $2.75 on Sundays. It might be lucky to survive until Labor Day. I give it until July.
I hope the New York Slimes is closely behind in shutting down. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of libs.
Re the same way
March 17, 2009 - 15:48 ET by slickwillie2001I see the network news shows like K-K-Katie's and Stephie's converging at some time in the future with the likes of John Stewart and Colbert. The networks just have to keep leaking credibility at the rate they are, and the comedy shows can keep doing what they are doing, and they will be indistinguishable. I give it five years or so.