

If newspapers are dying, what will replace them? - abdulkundi

Every quarter long established newspapers are reporting decline in ad dollars. This scenario is forcing them to cut journalistic staff. Some have even gone so far to file for bankruptcy. Others are cutting down on home deliveries.<p>In this scenario, will the bloggers replace newspapers as a source for local news. But if that is true who will aggregate these bloggers to provide latest local news, traffic condition and city hall announcements.<p>what is the future of local news? is the real question.<p>regards<p>kundi
======
gr366
I think you're right that "what is the future of local news?" is the real
question, rather than "what will replace newspapers?"

Working at a newspaper (online dept.), I think these organizations still
haven't come to the realization that print isn't going to rebound (very much a
"buggy whip" situation, as leed25d suggested). We see reports that show that
newspapers' customer base is literally dying off. The younger generations
don't have the same place in their lives for dead-tree news.

The economic downturn and advertising nosedive will decrease the available
time window for newspapers to evolve. I think many will not make it. This
could be a good thing. If there is a need for their services, something will
appear to take their place (and eventually something with a viable business
model). Startups will lead the way in innovation, and the smart newspapers
that survived will learn to rapidly adopt what works (and hopefully cultivate
a spirit of innovation themselves).

To be fair, I know a number of "traditional" journalists that have made the
leap to Twitter, Digg, StumbleUpon, etc and have embraced these new forms to
build flow, readership and conversation. I expect these folks to adapt and
provide the professional expertise required for in-depth investigative
journalism.

~~~
abdulkundi
thanks for your detailed reply. I personally feel that introduction of a new
platform does not kill it but rather forces it to reshape and evolve with a
niche. For instance TV did not kill radio and internet did not kill TV. All of
these are still existent with their own niche appeal.

I also feel that people do need local news about their communities. All of us
are concerned how our city councilman are doing. We also want to know the
state of our schools. We also want to know the updates of a murder
investigation etc. etc. So i feel that local news will remain relevant.

The Newspaper i feel will have to team up with new technology companies to
provide service on a revenue share basis. Plus advertising platform will also
evolve for local newspapers.

------
billturner
I don't see bloggers only replacing the news, unless those bloggers are just
the journalists switching from writing a column in the paper, to publishing
their articles at the newspaper's website (maybe in weblog format).

I think the biggest problem for local/print news has more to do with how
delayed the news gets to the reader. If anything, I would see more newspapers
abandoning or reducing paper editions in favor of online-only news (like the
Christian Science Monitor (I think it was them)).

------
knieveltech
Local TV isn't likely to expand coverage beyond the items typically reported
on during daily broadcasts. In the mean time the kind of local and hyperlocal
coverage traditionally handled by print media journalists is going to be
largely absent, which will in turn reduce the amount of grist for the
blogosphere.

Some believe that bloggers will pick up the slack (and possibly even improve
coverage) when newspapers drop off. Having worked for the 2nd largest
newspaper company in North America for a couple years now I'm unconvinced.
Simply put quality journalism (as opposed to editorializing) requires a
tremendous amount of time and effort to pull off, and is very expensive.

~~~
abdulkundi
i largely agree with you that on-ground reporting is important for accuracy of
the news item. But on the other hand how important accuracy is as compared to
frequent updates by users. For instance reporting of a sports score or traffic
jam on a highway by a user through his cell phone is still quite useful for
people.

If an online site emerges that gains traffic from a city audience, do you
think local service providers like pizza, restaurants or plumbers will
advertise on it.

~~~
knieveltech
Just about every major media outlet is currently experimenting with various
approaches to fusing high-quality journalistic content with high-quality user
contributed content. This can range from simplistic story commenting
implementations to more involved user review & ratings systems. I believe that
this is the future (if one exists) for print media outlets.

As to hyper-local advertising, there is definitely a market here. I've seen
several instances where local community sites have (very) successfully
monetized through a combination of local service provider ads and ad network
positions.

~~~
abdulkundi
Do we know of any company that has successfully used hyper-local market idea
to grow exponentially?

~~~
knieveltech
Exponentially? Not that I'm aware of. I've seen examples of highly focused
niche sites that have generated nontrivial (and growing) ad revenue, but so
far nothing viral. And really this touches on one of the key problems in the
newspaper world today: editors who are looking for the next Big Thing to
replace the classifieds cash cow. I believe tremendous resources are being
squandered on what is basically a waste of time. If there was one overarching
business model that was going to "save" newspapers, someone would have struck
on it by now and everyone would be following suit. The future (again if one
exists) is in many carefully managed small revenue streams.

~~~
abdulkundi
From the discussion here emerges another question. Is professional content
creation out of date? Do users appreciate professional content so much that
they are willing to be inconvenienced in terms of money or time to acquire it?

~~~
knieveltech
The guys over at the New York Times sure seem to thing so. They've been
beating the "switch to paid subscription models online" drum pretty hard
recently. The real differentiator is absolute top-shelf content. As far as I
can tell (and my own surfing habits reflect this so I may have a personal
bias) most folks don't much care where they get their content from as long as
it's thoughtful, well-written and at least bears the appears of solid fact-
checking. YMMV. The one thing that I think everyone in the industry agrees on
is the kind of vanilla content that's coming off the wire these days is
absolutely insufficient to attract users to an online portal. That crap is a
commodity freely available on any number of aggregator sites.

------
leed25d
I do not believe that they will necessarily be replaced with anything, really.
They may just go the way of the buggy whip.

