New York Times: sales down; profits down by 95.7%


#1

New York Times: sales down; profits almost zero

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3897406/New-York-Times-reports-95-7-percent-fall-quarterly-profit.html


#2

Most large city newspapers are trying to make the change from print to digital. Good luck with that. :shrug:


#3

At some point I wonder if remaining print papers will all have to become tabloid sized, just to save paper costs.


#4

This gives me hope. What is circulation like for New York Post? :shrug:


#5

What will tomorrow’s fish be wrapped in??

:):):slight_smile:


#6

The fishwrap…

wdtprs.com/blog/2016/10/fishwrap-rots-from-the-head-down/


#7

Monetizing digital has been a big disappointment, it certainly isn’t enough to fund doing journalism. Some spokesman from the NY Times recently at a publisher’s conference proposed blocking users who use ad-blockers. This caused a ----storm because allowing ads can leave you vulnerable to ransomware.

Ad revenues are plummeting for all papers, see this article from the Columbia Journalism Review.

We’re in for interesting times. What will happen when print is dead and nothing is quite ready to take over?


#8

It needs more cowbell.


#9

Good question - the news on the internet doesn’t write itself.


#10

What doesn’t need more cowbell?


#11

Putting aside the struggles of print media and the rise of alternative news outlets, I have to say it isn’t terribly surprising that in an era defined by a rejection of the establishment, people aren’t flocking to mainstream, establishment news sources. People just don’t trust mainstream media anymore – left or right — and people certainly won’t pay money for the news if they think it is actively trying to deceive them. On the one hand I can’t help but take pleasure in seeing the media get their comeuppance, but on the other hand it would be a shame if we were only left with ultra-partisan news sources. The mainstream media may be facing a quick death, but I sincerely hope a neutral news source(s) can rise to take its place.


#12

Someone has to put the right spin on stories too. :slight_smile:


#13

I think the reason is much simpler than that. People are getting used to the idea of getting news for free. So why should they pay for it? As for what is “rising to take the place of mainstream media”, I really doubt that it will be any less biased. If anything, the alternative news sources seem to be much more biased - both for the left and the right.

One of the unfortunate side effects of moving to electronic news is that it is easier and easier for a reader to insulate himself from a wide range of views. People tend to search out sources that speak to their own particular biases. How many people on the left read Breitbart regularly? How many people on the right read Mother Jones regularly?

With a physical printed newspaper or magazine, the reader is at least occasionally exposed to articles or editorials that challenge his view, even if it is only in the process of flipping pages to get to the latest Marmaduke. This is not a problem for one side only.


#14

Right. I’m not a fan of the mainstream media and I know there are biases present, but I don’t necessarily think that these smaller online news sources have less of a bias. I think journalistic integrity as a whole is on a downward trend—which is really unfortunate. And I cannot imagine that a reduction in revenue will lead to more professionalism and less bias in reporting the news.


#15

:eek: - A LOT of businesses are failing during these Obama years … but this one doesn’t seem to notice … from the looks of things.

How are the abortion clinics doing profitwise?

:newidea: - Maybe our leader is better than I thought! :whistle: :nope:


#16

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.