Rocky Mountain News all done

[Lori]

Inside the newspaper industry, it's long been suspected that 2009 will be the year when multiple big-time newspapers start closing up shop.

 

So it begins:

 

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2009...-final-edition/

 

Colorado's oldest newspaper will publish its final edition Friday.

 

The Rocky Mountain News, less than two months away from its 150th anniversary, will be closed after a search for a buyer proved unsuccessful, the E.W. Scripps Co. announced today.

 

"Today the Rocky Mountain News, long the leading voice in Denver, becomes a victim of changing times in our industry and huge economic challenges," Rich Boehne, chief executive officer of Scripps, said in a prepared statement. "The Rocky is one of America’s very best examples of what local news organizations need to be in the future. Unfortunately, the partnership’s business model is locked in the past."

 

What this means for us: no more Broncos news from Jeff Legwold (who also holds Denver's HOF vote) and Lee Rasizer, or columns from Dave Krieger or Bernie Lincicome. The Seattle P-I is in the same boat -- if no buyer steps forward by the middle of March, they're most likely gone as well. P-I Seahawks beat writer Clare Farnsworth has Seattle's HOF vote.

 

Sonuvabitch.

[cåblelady]

Damn.

[Da Big Man]

more casualties alongside the information superhighway.

[Bullpen]

The thing the Rocky had going for it, was it was a tabloid size paper and lots of readers seemed to like that.

 

I know a few of the writers (professionally speaking) for that paper and it's horrible to see this happen to them. Although, most suspected it was coming and the few that I knew had already started planning an alternative plan.

 

Link to the RMN website:

 

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2009...-final-edition/

 

Chances are if Legwold doesn't end up at the post, which very well could happen, the HOF vote will go to Jim Armstrong.

[Lori]

The Post is a Lean Dean Singleton enterprise. Never say never, but it's far more likely that they'll make cuts of their own now that the competition is gone than bring anyone else in.

[Bullpen]

The Post is a Lean Dean Singleton enterprise. Never say never, but it's far more likely that they'll make cuts of their own now that the competition is gone than bring anyone else in.

 

Like I said, then perhaps Jim Armstrong or even better Woody Paige will get the Denver HOF vote then...

[Gordio]

Inside the newspaper industry, it's long been suspected that 2009 will be the year when multiple big-time newspapers start closing up shop.

 

So it begins:

 

 

 

What this means for us: no more Broncos news from Jeff Legwold (who also holds Denver's HOF vote) and Lee Rasizer, or columns from Dave Krieger or Bernie Lincicome. The Seattle P-I is in the same boat -- if no buyer steps forward by the middle of March, they're most likely gone as well. P-I Seahawks beat writer Clare Farnsworth has Seattle's HOF vote.

 

Sonuvabitch.

 

 

What do you expect. I do not know how any newspaper can compete with the internet anymore. Let me ask you something & I am asking this in all seriousness. Why would anybody buy a buffalo news or any paper for that matter when they could get it for free on the internet on a daily basis?

[UConn James]

What do you expect. I do not know how any newspaper can compete with the internet anymore. Let me ask you something & I am asking this in all seriousness. Why would anybody buy a buffalo news or any paper for that matter when they could get it for free on the internet on a daily basis?

 

Well, that's the point, and there's the rub.

 

When most every paper closes shop, there won't be much of anything left to link to on the Internet re: news.

 

W/o it, what's the Internet going to become? Pornography (as ever), and a sounding board for dopes in message boards/chat who get their info from the broadcast media sounding board with 'news' like "Man Shoots Neighbor" --> a bunch of mouth-breathers saying, "He was always so quiet," "I never thought something like that could happen here." Over and over and over. Retard rodeo here we come.

 

For a while now, folks have just been debating about how print media could survive in the digital age. They dragged their feet for the past couple of decades and no one seems to have come to any real answer. And they're going to die now. Them's breaks, boys and girls. The more people have grown accustomed to getting their news for free (as if it just writes itself) the more they now expect to continue getting their news for free. Well, that gravy train is going to be coming to an end one way or the other.

[Lori]

What do you expect. I do not know how any newspaper can compete with the internet anymore. Let me ask you something & I am asking this in all seriousness. Why would anybody buy a buffalo news or any paper for that matter when they could get it for free on the internet on a daily basis?

That's the question. Lot of people looking for the answer, but nobody's come up with a good one. Chuck Ward, the former ME/publisher at the Olean Times Herald, was dead set against putting content on a free Web site; they still put a very small percentage of their stuff online, and then, not until the paper is already on the stands. I do the same thing -- we go to press on Wednesday night, and none of my stories are uploaded before Thursday morning.

 

But when you talk about newspapers competing with the internet, take a step back and look at how much of the news on the Web is provided by newspapers. Won't be able to get that content for free if nobody's there to write it in the first place. And there's the thought that should scare the crap out of everybody.

 

Edit: not surprised that we think alike on this, UConn.

[Gordio]

That's the question. Lot of people looking for the answer, but nobody's come up with a good one. Chuck Ward, the former ME/publisher at the Olean Times Herald, was dead set against putting content on a free Web site; they still put a very small percentage of their stuff online, and then, not until the paper is already on the stands. I do the same thing -- we go to press on Wednesday night, and none of my stories are uploaded before Thursday morning.

 

But when you talk about newspapers competing with the internet, take a step back and look at how much of the news on the Web is provided by newspapers. Won't be able to get that content for free if nobody's there to write it in the first place. And there's the thought that should scare the crap out of everybody.

 

Edit: not surprised that we think alike on this, UConn.

 

 

Both you & Uconn make sense. I really do not know what the answer. I know the NY Post used to make you register to get into an article but they stopped doing that awhile ago.

 

BTW, I buy a Buffalo News everyday at the news stand before I come into the office. I really do not know why I do it. Habit I guess. But everyday, like the idiot I am I plop down my 50 cents, um excuse me 75 cents & take my paper.

[Cornerville]

Sad.

[UConn James]

Edit: not surprised that we think alike on this, UConn.

 

The sh-tty thing is, I wasted my time and my money at the U. Graduated summa cum laude and I couldn't buy an unpaid internship, much less a job where people with 10+ years experience lined up in droves.

 

Now, five years out I'm unemployable in it, even if anyone were hiring or will be hiring if a miracle takes place. I've been working construction (what I did during summers) ever since. Really am at the crossroads and it's like whatever direction I choose there's a 'Do Not Enter' sign. When people see "journalism" their eyes get all beady, and they grow dark and secretive like some kind of Tolkien character.

 

I'm considering sending my diploma back to the registrar's office.

[Lori]

The Post is a Lean Dean Singleton enterprise. Never say never, but it's far more likely that they'll make cuts of their own now that the competition is gone than bring anyone else in.

 

Or, I could be wrong about that. Krieger to the Post, along with some citysiders: http://poynter.org/forum/view_post.asp?id=13833

[eSJayDee]

I don't really have any sentimentality about newspapers, but I think the problem w/ them is that their model is antiquated.

There was a time that I subscribed to the Buffalo News via snail mail; IIRC, it cost about $5/week & I got the news 2 days late most of the time. They probably lost $ on the direct cost of sending me back then.

Bear in mind, from my observation, most of the content of local papers is provided by news agencies anyway (UPI, AP).

Just recently, the local TimesUseless was touting the fact that they joined a "syndicate" that allowed them to share resources w/ other local papers. IMO, basically, just a news agency on a smaller, more regional level.

My understanding is that the cost of physically producing a newspaper exceeds the cover price. Consider that the same paper is often available on a subscription basis at a far cheaper rate. As per above, a significant %age of their content (i.e. what they provide) is available elsewhere as they're basically just repackaging it. I believe they derive a significant %age of their revenue from Want Ads/advertising. Last I checked Ad costs they were obscene (a few hundred $ for a few line job ad; that or more of a real estate listing). Now that there are other, much cheaper and arguably more effective means of advertising (ebay, Monster, etc) there goes that revenue stream.

Some of their better, original content people will essentially provide for free (think back to the early yrs of TSW or BillsDaily - I'd rate the original content provided by them w/ most of the stuff professionals provide.

Unfortunately, some of the service they provide, I'm thinking investigative journalism in particular, just can't be supported.

That's the only thing I feel is unfortunate. We've got dozens of talented people here that would gladly write about the Bills for free and would actually probably pay for the access that professional journalists are afforded. Problem is, it's hard to justify the probably several hundred if not few thousand $ that a good "scoop" costs to produce. Few are willing to put forth that sort of effort for next to nothing and newspapers no longer have the "cushion" of supplementing this form of journalism w/ more lucrative aspects of their business.

The fact that newspapers are dieing, I don't really care. I recognize that journalism is taking a hit and that is unfortunate.

[Bullpen]

Well, that's the point, and there's the rub.

 

When most every paper closes shop, there won't be much of anything left to link to on the Internet re: news.

 

W/o it, what's the Internet going to become? Pornography (as ever), and a sounding board for dopes in message boards/chat who get their info from the broadcast media sounding board with 'news' like "Man Shoots Neighbor" --> a bunch of mouth-breathers saying, "He was always so quiet," "I never thought something like that could happen here." Over and over and over. Retard rodeo here we come.

 

For a while now, folks have just been debating about how print media could survive in the digital age. They dragged their feet for the past couple of decades and no one seems to have come to any real answer. And they're going to die now. Them's breaks, boys and girls. The more people have grown accustomed to getting their news for free (as if it just writes itself) the more they now expect to continue getting their news for free. Well, that gravy train is going to be coming to an end one way or the other.

 

I started writing/editing for base newspapers in the Air Force back in the early 90s (obviously a far cry from the daily grind of major or even small-market newspaper work) they were telling us that withing the next five to seven years most newspapers would end up online. The days of going to the base exchange or chow hall and picking up the paper on friday morning would go the way of hot wax and paste-up. Of course I didn't believe it at the time. Boy was I wrong. (BTW, I can't believe I've been doing this writing/editing/designing gig for almost 16 years now... that means my wife must be getting old?)

 

Now I would venture to say about 80 to 90% of all military newspapers are "paperless" or printed in very limited quantity for the retirees who may not or refuse to read online versions of the paper.

 

BTW James, the mouth-breathers phrase had me laughing out loud!

[Lori]

Bear in mind, from my observation, most of the content of local papers is provided by news agencies anyway (UPI, AP). Just recently, the local TimesUseless was touting the fact that they joined a "syndicate" that allowed them to share resources w/ other local papers. IMO, basically, just a news agency on a smaller, more regional level.

True for national news, maybe. Local, no.

 

My understanding is that the cost of physically producing a newspaper exceeds the cover price. Consider that the same paper is often available on a subscription basis at a far cheaper rate. As per above, a significant %age of their content (i.e. what they provide) is available elsewhere as they're basically just repackaging it. I believe they derive a significant %age of their revenue from Want Ads/advertising. Last I checked Ad costs they were obscene (a few hundred $ for a few line job ad; that or more of a real estate listing). Now that there are other, much cheaper and arguably more effective means of advertising (ebay, Monster, etc) there goes that revenue stream.

True.

 

Some of their better, original content people will essentially provide for free (think back to the early yrs of TSW or BillsDaily - I'd rate the original content provided by them w/ most of the stuff professionals provide.

Categorically false, unless you can find someone willing to cover the team, work sources, go into the locker room, home AND road, on his or her own dime. I've had people compliment me on my Bills stuff ... but who do you think my primary sources of information are? Precisely.

 

Unfortunately, some of the service they provide, I'm thinking investigative journalism in particular, just can't be supported.

That's the only thing I feel is unfortunate. We've got dozens of talented people here that would gladly write about the Bills for free and would actually probably pay for the access that professional journalists are afforded. Problem is, it's hard to justify the probably several hundred if not few thousand $ that a good "scoop" costs to produce. Few are willing to put forth that sort of effort for next to nothing and newspapers no longer have the "cushion" of supplementing this form of journalism w/ more lucrative aspects of their business.

The fact that newspapers are dieing, I don't really care. I recognize that journalism is taking a hit and that is unfortunate.

 

“Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”

-- Thomas Jefferson

[eSJayDee]

QUOTE

Some of their better, original content people will essentially provide for free (think back to the early yrs of TSW or BillsDaily - I'd rate the original content provided by them w/ most of the stuff professionals provide.

 

Categorically false, unless you can find someone willing to cover the team, work sources, go into the locker room, home AND road, on his or her own dime. I've had people compliment me on my Bills stuff ... but who do you think my primary sources of information are? Precisely.

 

I did say SOME. Chris Brown, Tim Graham & I believe it's Alan Wilson seem to have some inside info, being "beat" guys. As for the D&C guys, I'm thinking particularly Sullivan, do you honestly think they're more "in tune" & up to date w/ Bills going on, than any # of the many of us that spend a couple of hrs or more a day, VOLUNTARILY, reading this stuff & watching each game twice. I'd like to point out that best I can figure, CB serves essentially as part of the Bills "marketing" (paid by them FOR them) and AFAIK, the only venue I'm familiar w/ TG from is ESPN online (& from my perspective TSW poster). Like many other activities, some amateurs produce better results than professionals (I speak 1st hand for auto restoration & believe it also to be the case w/ woodworking & PC programming.)

 

You are presumably in the minority in that in your professional capacity/connections provides you w/ info that others of us wouldn't be privy to. But there are other posters here, whom I often enjoy their musings (& find them more insightful) more than that of the professional "editorials".

 

Again, I contend that there are some of us that would be WILLING TO PAY for the access that these professionals are afforded. Whether that includes attending all away games, I'm not so sure.

 

I find the TJ quote intriguing. I'd contend that civilization is impossible w/out SOME form of govt, be it even informal. As for the newspapers, again bear in mind that quote is about 200 yrs old. (I'd bet he didn't mention living w/o a cellphone or Tivo to be unfathomable )

 

It's unfortunate for the insiders that Newpaper publishing is a dieing industry. But much like Blacksmiths were hurt when "horseless carriages" displaced them & their livelihood, journalists will likely eventually find some other form of sufficiency. Journalism itself is something beneficial to us all.

[bills_fan]

Why would anybody buy a buffalo news or any paper for that matter when they could get it for free on the internet on a daily basis?

 

Because I'd rather not stare at a computer screen on the train? I tend to buy two papers a day, NY Post for fun and WSJ for information.

 

Buying a paper with a bunch of syndicate coverage would be a waste, IMHO. You can get that online. The real value is the local writers and their various slants.

 

The WSJ seems to have a great online model, much of the stuff is for paid subscribers, but some of it is free. The free stuff helps drive traffic to the site, the paid stuff is the real good stuff. Of course, flybys will not pay, but you still charge for the ads. Those that pay (and register) presumably permit you to charge higher advertising rates because you have demographical information.

[Bad Lieutenant]

San Francisco Chronicle is also on the ropes.

[Just Jack]

I prefer a newspaper over reading it online. Kind of hard to balance a laptop while sitting on the toilet. Plus I've found articles in the paper, that I can't locate on my local papers webpage. I have noticed our paper shrunk alot in the past 6 months, not sure how much longer they may be around, if I remember right, they've raised their price twice in the last year.