|
<
Previous | Next
> | Home
Intro | Content Analysis | Audience | Economics | Ownership | News Investment | Public Attitudes | Conclusion | Charts & Tables
By the Project for Excellence in
Journalism with Rick Edmonds
Intro
For more than two generations, the percentage of Americans
reading newspapers has been shrinking. Until 1970 the problem
was partially masked by population growth. Overall circulation
kept rising. Through the 1980s most of the circulation losses
were occurring in afternoon papers. The survivors were stable
and financially robust.
In 1990, however, circulation began declining in absolute
terms. It became clearer that the young, the next generation
of likely readers, were failing to develop a newspaper reading
habit. The lack of immigrant readers and the middle class
also became more pressing as those populations grew and now
several mainstream newspaper companies are now pursuing the
Spanish-language market in particular. What's more, some data
now suggest that people who began reading newspapers in recent
years-including young people-have stopped. Newspapers are
now losing readers across age and demographic groups.
Financially, things have been stronger. The surviving newspapers
in town have remained the one place where advertisers can
reach the most people with a single ad buy. The demographics
are also attractive. If you want to reach opinion and business
leaders and the most affluent people in a town, newspapers
are the way to go. Revenues and profits in the 1990s have
grown robustly, even as circulation has declined.
At the same time, newspapers in any given town usually remain
the institution, at least as measured by number of reporters
and editors and in our content analysis, with the greatest
newsgathering capacity, the widest range of coverage, and
largest number of stories each day. Newspapers, in other words,
are still the biggest watchdog in town.
The financial strategies of the last two decades brought
gains, but in retrospect may also have deferred long-term
problems. Chasing demographics rather than readership was
a lucrative strategy. But the industry invested comparatively
little in things like training, research and development or
in long-term projects to attract lost or emerging audience
groups. If you were making a lot of money, what was the marginal
advantage of investing heavily in more newsgathering to chase
less affluent readers?
Now the industry faces an important question. Given their
history and their relative strengths, do newspapers believe
that if they invest in creating new content and even new kinds
of newspapers they can attract new readers? Or is this a mature
and declining industry where investing in those things would
be throwing money away?
<
Previous | Next
> | Home
Intro | Content Analysis | Audience | Economics | Ownership | News Investment | Public Attitudes | Conclusion | Charts & Tables
|