

Newspaper Ad Revenues Collapse to 1950 Levels - da02
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/18/Newspaper-Ad-Revenues-Collapses-to-1950-Levels

======
everlost
Link to original source - [http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/09/freefall-
adjusted-for-in...](http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/09/freefall-adjusted-for-
inflation-print.html)

~~~
ChuckMcM
Yes, that is a _much_ better link, and its fascinating.

I interpret the data to be that global expansion of advertising 'inventory',
bloggers can try to take credit but the credit rests solely on Google, and
more specifically on Google's AdSense for Content program.

Advertisers want _reach_ to get to as many people as possible and Google could
offer longer reach for the same amount of money, so advertisers started
switching. And they are a herd, it works for Proctor and Gamble it will work
for Macys or Safeway. When I can put my advertisment on a billion blog pages
and only pay when someone actually cares enough to click on it? Win! No need
for the customer to say "Oh I saw your ad in the Tribune" or special phone
numbers to know where the lead came from. More analytics than you could shake
a stick at, better targeting, and visible results. What's not to like?

Google has been strangling the newspaper business by taking away their
advertising revenue. Newspapers don't have a model yet where they can live off
their subscriptions. That much is true. But even if the papers die and are
reborn into something that is more like the Economist than the Daily Mail,
amateur journalist bloggers will be no less successful at displacing
professional journalists than amateur photographers have displaced
professional ones.

------
drcube
Yeah right, Fox News is going to save us from the corrupt paleomedia shills
like CNN? Lame.

If this guy represents the "New Media", I'm going to buy a newspaper right
now.

------
logn
I can't even read this article it's so vitriolic. Maybe the newspapers are
better at hiding it than this guy but at least it makes them easier to read.
Wow, a sad day when an article like this, filled with such hate and lousy
writing, celebrates the downfall of newspapers.

------
k-mcgrady
A lot of the comments on the site seem to be blaming the papers for publishing
poor content when better, more objective content was available online. I don't
think this is true. People stopped buying newspapers because they could get
the basics online for free and more up-to-date. If something is available for
free people aren't going to pay for it.

I still find the experience of a newspaper better and the content slightly
better and more in-depth than what is available online (although this is
changing, more often than not the content of the paper is available
identically online now).

~~~
kmfrk
It's breitbart.com. I wouldn't read the comments.

~~~
k-mcgrady
First I've heard of it. The comments seemed a bit crazy.

------
eli
_First off, the business model of being shameless left-wing shills when
alternative and honest opinion is available online just isn't working_

Ah yes, of course.

