Massachusetts Bill Set to Subsidize Newspaper Subscriptions

[justgladtobehere]

It may have civic value, but you still have to figure out a business model. Just saying there is some value to the institution doesn't solve its problems. Constantly complaining about "corporate ownership" in whatever form doesn't do anything. Newspapers were owned by corporations for centuries.

 

[I Should Coco]

Opinion | Why Has Local News Collapsed? Blame Readers.

You should read Waldman's pitch in the Washington Monthly, but even if we build such a subsidy and tax-credited operation, can masses of readers be enticed to come? Are journalists designing local news initiatives that gratify them and their academics colleagues, but that lack appeal to readers? As my friend Jason Pontin, former editor and publisher of Technology Review, noted last month, "media types sentimentalize local news because it presents local news journalists as a heroic caste 'holding the powerful to account' and binding communities together." But this "fetishization" of local news ignores the unwillingness of the public to pay for the product. Local news just isn't producing a product that people need."

. ...

The local news movement won't make much progress until its proponents realize that its primary obstacle is a demand-side one, not a supply-side one. It's not that nobody wants to read local news; it's just that not enough people do to make it a viable business. Maybe the surfeit of local news of yesteryear was the product of an economic accident, a moment that cannot be reclaimed. But even if you were to underwrite local news with taxes and philanthropy, and distribute it to citizens via subsidies, you'd still have to find a way to get people to read it. Until some editorial genius cracks that puzzle, the local news quest will remain a charitable, niche project advanced by journalistic, academic and political elites.

He makes the point many of us have made here repeatedly: You can't force people to eat their vegetables.

It's hard to say if local news coverage is less popular or valued than it used to be in healthier days for newspapers, because other "goodies" like hearty sports sections, comics, entertainment coverage and (hate to say this) tons of advertising drew readers into the paper. Maybe those goodies got readers to eat a few more veggies of local news coverage.

 

[Azrael]

He makes the point many of us have made here repeatedly: You can't force people to eat their vegetables.

It's hard to say if local news coverage is less popular or valued than it used to be in healthier days for newspapers, because other "goodies" like hearty sports sections, comics, entertainment coverage and (hate to say this) tons of advertising drew readers into the paper. Maybe those goodies got readers to eat a few more veggies of local news coverage.

They've never eaten their vegetables. That hasn't changed.

That's why subscriptions alone were never enough to cover the cost of producing a general-interest news product. You had to sell advertising as well.

And it's why we need a new business model.

 

[I Should Coco]

They've never eaten their vegetables. That hasn't changed.

That's why subscriptions alone were never enough to cover the cost of producing a general-interest news product. You had to sell advertising as well.

And it's why we need a new business model.

Yes. Subscriptions alone, or even great local news coverage, hasn't carried smaller newspapers who've gone online only, either.

Remember the Seattle Post-Intelligencer? It ditched the print edition during the 2008-09 recession, vowing to continue its vigorous coverage of the Puget Sound region. It's a hollow shell of its former self now.

 

[Azrael]

BuzzFeed News' business model turned to dust because they were always at the whim of mercurial tech titans | James Hennessy

 

[Azrael]

Vice Media cancels its flagship 'Vice News Tonight' program as it makes 'painful' layoffs and restructures the company | CNN Business