Well no wonder internet is taking over why would I read news and pay 50c when I can get all for free online?

If newspaper goes away, what will I lite my BBQ with?

Yet more proof that in a world where there is an ever-increasing amount of information available to us, there’s less and less attention available for each source!

There will always be a role for impressions to reinforce brand presence. Over time, though, I think everyone sees that advertisers will need to also engage in interactive communications with customers and prospects.

From an advertiser perspective, this is at least a little scary: they can control a one-way message, but an n-way discussion can get into areas the advertiser would prefer to avoid. Scarier still, though, is the knowledge that the discussions will happen regardless - and that the advertisers need to find ways to establish an authentic voice within the conversation!

Thanks for the post and data!

Unfortunately the newspaper industry is just now figuring out (if indeed they have) that they are in the information delivery business. Now they’ve been Googled. It is too late as an industry to survive at their current cost levels. More “rightsizing” is required in order to survive and move forward with the web as the medium, and not ink and paper. Tough future.

newspaper won’t exist in the future anyway .. they will be on mobile phone or over internet.. why ? people are using more and more internet everyday.. so its sound logical for advertiser to get this brand new market with more interaction …..
I just wonder if internet is ready for this new era … Does internet provider network are ready for all this rich media …. that’s another story

It’s not at a total decline, it’s being offset - to some degree, by their online counterparts.

@2, you BBQ? lol - i thought you ate out all the time

This is some of the best news ever for the environment.

yeah, but this would be more informative if it was correlated with the decline of general circulation…. and, though it is not possible, correlated with a decline in “quality”

I expect this trend to continue and for all news to be read “online” in one form or another.

The main flaw with newspaper is that it is closed. As in, unlike internet Internet I cant explore news from other sources. All I get in a newspaper is a small closed article, I read it or I dont. I cant go to wikipedia or to google for further information on the topic.

Why is it a “sad decline?” Less ink on fingers = good

Print is dead.

Erick, your posts are not very orderly in my Outlook Feeds. Any possibility you can float your images to the left or right? I know I’m being picky.. but it’s just your posts with images.

Cheers

I predict newspapers undergoing a serious restructuring. Many newspapers with large overhead will likely go out of business as new ones emerge with more reasonable business models and more solid strategies for online distribution and advertising, albeit with a physical print component.

I loved the rumour about the Google magazine. There’s something about reading things on paper that a digital device can’t so far mimic; however, if I can get some of the things I like, but, say, ditch the sport, fantastic.

Actually, I foresee a consequential danger further down the road. If we only look at the information that interests us, as personalisation technology gets increasingly powerful we’re more and more likely to disappear into our own little knowledge bubbles. It’s as important to be exposed to people and data different to our usual interests as to be able to find ones that fit in. Through exposure to differences comes tolerance.

Hopefully, print is only restructuring. There’s still very much a role for it.

Does anyone have up-to-date metrics on magazine circulation and ad spends? I wonder how newspapers and magazines would compare.

Newspapers have always included timeliness as one of their primary sources of value; on that count, they have of course been trumped. Magazines, on the other hand, have an entirely different usage model - hence my comparison question.

Great post!
However, I must disagree with some of the posts that say print is dead. While all of the news is negative toward newspapers and print in general the fact is that online ad growth has yet to double itself over prior year - ever. “Online” is the future… there is no doubt - but not until WE figure out how to effectively target and track for the advertiser. Google & MySpace have been dabbling with this technology and experiencing a bit of a lash back - with no significant results. So, from that respect newspapers still dominate the local marketplace - hence the 7.4% decline with a mere $10 billiion in revenues to the industry.

And while newspapers ad dollars are in decline those dollars are not moving online. Look at the numbers above…. a $1 billion dollar decline and internet ad dollars are only $773 million? The dollars are moving to other media and internet has yet to prove itself to the big spenders……………….

Just my two cents worth. I agre though it is time that the news industry (which I am part of) restructure and develop - which some of us are doing faster than others.

Enjoy!

Why is there a bubble showing a $12B+ Inflation gap? What does that have to do with anything other than showing how far back in time the graph goes? A little irrelevant and misleading.

Is there really a good reason why print ads are more valuable to advertisers than online ads? Online ads are more targeted, animated and interactive. Is this evidence that online ads are significantly undervalued? Maybe because online ads make it very easy to see in detail the immediate results whereas the longterm benefits haven’t been understood yet.

The fact that most all newspaper publishers (even the smallest ones) are revamping or beefing up their online presence is quite telling as to the state of the print industry.

I’m glad! This will save a lot of trees

I agree that newspapers are soon to be defunct, but it will have nothing to do with Beezoos and that etch-a-sketch crap he’s pedlin’

http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com

This speaks to why newspapers, to be blunt, should not be organized as profit-driven institutions responsible to shareholders or investors as opposed to the communities they serve. There are a few examples of community-owned and non-profit newspapers, and each of them performs quite well and delivers a quality product. As ad revenues go down, the resources available to and the simple number of reporters goes down, which leads to fewer readers, which starts the vicious cycle all over again. The fourth estate needs a new model, and I don’t think that one driven by the profit motive will work.

Classified advertising in print newspapers in India is at a record high, but mobile handsets are ubiquitous too.

My understanding is that the free weekly newspapers are doing quite well and certainly seem to be chock full of advertising.

It would be interesting to break those out or include that data for comparison.

I pick up a local weekly and also check the website. There’s some overlap in what I’m looking for but I regularly use both. One of the biggest things I’m seeing in my own behavior is that since I have less time for enjoying a print source, the free weekly eats up all the time that I would consider devoting to newspapers.

Books and magazines take up the rest of my print attention. Books tend to be denser and richer sources than newspapers while magazines are more entertaining and sometimes more informative.

For breaking news the web rules.

So the traditional daily is what’s feeling the pain and there’s no reason that should change given that their web attempts generally represent sustaining innovations and they’re getting their rear ends kicked by disruptive approaches like that of Craigslist.

Listen, Web 2.0 Revolutionaries: Print is as dead as the Super Bowl or Network TV or the Box Office or the radio. Do you realize that very few newspapers across the country actually lose money. For the comment about how they should be reorganized as non-profits…this would be a smart idea if the papers actually lost money and couldn’t function as profitable entities. Is circulation going to go down? Definitely. Are print revenues going to go down in the future? Of course. Are the profits of even the most embattled newspaper group greater than the total revenues of Craigslist, the 7th most trafficked site on the web? Yes. Fantastic internet traffic still doesn’t translate to big profits for most Web 1.0 or Web 2.0 companies. Would a genius like Rupert Murdoch buy a newspaper in 2007 if print was headed for death? Give me a break.

At least I won’t get my hands dirty ready NY Times’ digital edition

No wonder the NY Times is canceling subscription fees to their dig edition.

Newspaper won’t died. They will be transformed !

god is dead

While I write this, there is a TV commercial running for SFGate.com – interesting…

In any case, the birth of television was also supposed to spell the end for newspapers, but 50 years later, they’re still here. The industry will change and lose a lot of its overall revenue, but, hopefully, will still find ways to be profitable. We need the journalistic tradition that newspapers provide. Google News and other search engines only point to newspaper articles, and blogs usually just report others’ stuff or rumors. Newspapers are still performing the investigative journalism that we need (even if there a fewer Woodward and Bernsteins).

I should point out that this post is based on US-only data. Worldwide, newspapers are still very healthy.

Interesting story here on the contrast of how the news is reported in the U.K. Financial Times vs. the U.S.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com.....enial.html