3 ms·

While web production costs may be lower than print-edition production costs ... the cost of editors, reporters, photographers, etc. -- that is, the people who a

by jawns 16y ago

While web production costs may be lower than print-edition production costs ... the cost of editors, reporters, photographers, etc. -- that is, the people who actually produce the content -- remains the same. Actually, it may even be more, since you've also got videographers and programmers and other content-producing positions that did not exist at most newspapers before the Web ... as well as a 24/7 news cycle, rather than just a one- or two-edition daily cycle.

chc 16y ago
Your average newspaper does not need huge squads of full-time programmers, sysadmins and videographers. I know several that are transitioning from an over-engineered third-party solution to a $50/mo VPS with WordPress. I'm our only in-house programmer, with freelancers filling in where it's needed. Is it the most amazing website ever? No, but it's capable of delivering the news (24/7, no less). If you want a little less seat-of-your-pants, you'd need maybe one or two more people. The overhead of running a website is substantially less than the overhead of printing ink on paper with expensive equipment and physically driving it all around town. Yes, you'll still need to pay for reporters, but those have always been dirt cheap. Yes, there will still be costs, but I didn't say it was free — just that the Web is not this absolute harbinger of doom the industry thinks it is. They're just not adapting well to the new environment.