Has there been any good newspaper news recently?

[VJ]

I saved 15% by switching my car insurance to GEICO.

 

[Write-brained]

My newspaper single-handedly forced the legislature to do something they've been putting off for years by printing a tremendous series of articles. Another newspaper in the same state did something similar. Can't beat that.

And just as someone else said, the fact that I still get a paycheck is always good news.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

Sure, there's all sorts of good news out there for newspapers. Not at the major metros, but at smaller papers.

 

[Basil Exposition]

I'm with Write-brained: Papers are still doing kick-ass journalism that is changing lives for the better (Walter Reed, to name one such package). That's what brought me into the business in the first place, so that's all the good news I need. As long as the flame still burns, I'm staying in the game.

I would also point to the fact that someone is offering 5 billion simoleons simply so that he can own the Wall Street Journal. Rupert Murdoch is not a stupid businessman. Heartless, yes. Corrupt, yes, but not stupid. So the conclusion I draw is that the print business model must not be as bankrupt as the conventional wisdom would suggest.

 

[steveu]

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

(Well, actually I'm at a Holiday Inn now, but don't tell anyone.)

Back on topic: Sure doesn't seem like it, does it?

 

[Write-brained]

I'm with Write-brained: Papers are still doing kick-ass journalism that is changing lives for the better (Walter Reed, to name one such package). That's what brought me into the business in the first place, so that's all the good news I need. As long as the flame still burns, I'm staying in the game.

I would also point to the fact that someone is offering 5 billion simoleons simply so that he can own the Wall Street Journal. Rupert Murdoch is not a stupid businessman. Heartless, yes. Corrupt, yes, but not stupid. So the conclusion I draw is that the print business model must not be as bankrupt as the conventional wisdom would suggest.

Thanks for agreeing with me in your first paragraph, though I don't see anything positive about your second graph.

Murdoch, and to a lesser extent Zell (the guy who's wanting to buy the Trib - don't know that I got his name right without looking it up) want to buy papers under the current business model, sure, but they don't want to keep the traditional journalism model. A Wall Street Journal owned by Murdoch wouldn't have the credibility it has now. The New York Times recently had a story showing that Murdoch has repeatedly played ball with the communist government in China in an attempt to get a national network there that would only have government news. Will a Murdoch-owned Journal continue to aggressively China, which is such a major player in the global economy? Really, really doubtful.

So while we may still have jobs, we have to ask ourselves what will we be doing? Some people have stuck up for Gannett on another thread, saying that at least the chain is still hiring people. But is it the same hard-hitting journalism that the papers did pre-Gannett? Rarely.

 

[Writer33]

I ain't braggin', but I got a raise.

 

[Bubbler]

I got a kick ass performance review. It even said, "We know you post on SJ all the time, but you're so cool, we don't care."

Honest.

 

[Some Guy]

I ain't braggin', but I got a raise.

Me too. A big-ass one.

 

[slappy4428]

I got a kick ass performance review. It even said, "We know you post on SJ all the time, but you're so cool, we don't care."

Honest.

Demonstrably cool?

 

[the_rookie]

I got a small raise this morning.

 

[Mystery_Meat]

I got a small raise this morning.

What red-blooded male doesn't?

Back on topic: Publisher of the metro in town that owns us apparently told some of our people (why I wasn't invited, who knows) that he doesn't think there'll be a daily version of his paper in 10 years, that it'll all be internet with the exception of a Sunday printed edition. I don't know if you'd call that good or bad news. I think it's a bit short-sighted myself: this is a paper that has something like 190,000 daily circ., I have a hard time picturing that number shrinking to the point where dropping a daily print product would be feasable. But that's why I'm a futureless weekly grunt with no options and no hope and not a big-time publisher.