For “dying,” newspapers sure do rake in the money
Wednesday, August 29th, 2007So the math, according to a former managing editor of the U.K. Observer, proves it — newspapers aren’t dying. They just smell funny.
And they still have great financial worth, too.
John Duncan, at his Web site “The Inksniffer,” says (and you can read the whole piece here):
Being a big believer in the power of markets to expose the truths behind people’s words, I thought I’d dig a little and work out how much it would cost me to buy a newspaper title from a group that really ought to sell it to me. That would be groups who believe that the future is digital in some way, who have no other synergistic newspapers in the same area and who could use the money. The New York Times and McClatchy have titles that fit into all those categories.
There’s two of them near his home, and one of them hits close to home for me, since I worked there:
I chose the Bradenton Herald and the Sarasota Herald Tribune. Neither is particularly good, or outrageously troubled. The SH-T is dull and lifeless but that is hardly extraordinary. It is a lazy monopolist with few ideas and no feel for its community. Again, not outstanding in any way. If there was a prize for being mediocre and average, the SH-T would win so often that it would get to keep the trophy.
ABOVE: Nicole Bogdas and I mug in front of her offending Michelin outside a Clearwater, Fla., eatery. (Photo by Angela M. Roberts)
Classes in video journalism