3 ms·

> That’s why newspapers had classified ads, even though they charged a nominal fee to subscribe. My assumption is that the salaries of reporters, editors was p

> That’s why newspapers had classified ads, even though they charged a nominal fee to subscribe. My assumption is that the salaries of reporters, editors was paid for by ads. The nominal fee for the paper was to pay for the pulp, ink. I mean if you just printed up millions of papers and gave them away, people would pick them up simply as raw material for lining their bird cages, for papier-mâché, to insulate their cardboard box home on the corner of 12th and Main.....

shortformblog 2y ago
I worked at a number of free tabloid newspapers in my day (one small-town exurban, one mid-sized car-centric metro area, one metro area where most people took public transit) and I will say that most people did not do this. Usually they just left the papers on the train or at the coffee shop. Nonetheless, the first half of your point—the ads usually paid for all the reporting—is correct.
ghaff 2y ago
Right. It is/was just a big bucket of money and obviously there were free papers given away on college campuses and subway stations. But, at least back in the day, newspaper subscriptions and newsstand/put your quarter in boxes basically paid for creating and delivering the physical copies. The generally dire journalism situation these days is there is mostly no physical distribution and physical advertising dollars have become digital dimes. And local news--which was never a really thriving business--is basically dead.
snowwrestler 2y ago
Quite a lot of papers were, and still are, given out for free. My city still supports 3 separate print newspapers that are free in coffee shops, libraries, corner boxes, etc. They’re a great way to keep up with the actions and gripes of the local community. Being such small operations, there is very light editing and the reporter’s point of view often comes through pretty clearly. All paid for via ads from local businesses. Quite a lot of the ads are from real estate agents, which I think reflects the belief that a lot of tourists are picking up the papers in addition to residents.

shortformblog 2y ago

I worked at a number of free tabloid newspapers in my day (one small-town exurban, one mid-sized car-centric metro area, one metro area where most people took public transit) and I will say that most people did not do this. Usually they just left the papers on the train or at the coffee shop. Nonetheless, the first half of your point—the ads usually paid for all the reporting—is correct.

ghaff 2y ago

Right. It is/was just a big bucket of money and obviously there were free papers given away on college campuses and subway stations. But, at least back in the day, newspaper subscriptions and newsstand/put your quarter in boxes basically paid for creating and delivering the physical copies. The generally dire journalism situation these days is there is mostly no physical distribution and physical advertising dollars have become digital dimes. And local news--which was never a really thriving business--is basically dead.

snowwrestler 2y ago

Quite a lot of papers were, and still are, given out for free. My city still supports 3 separate print newspapers that are free in coffee shops, libraries, corner boxes, etc. They’re a great way to keep up with the actions and gripes of the local community. Being such small operations, there is very light editing and the reporter’s point of view often comes through pretty clearly. All paid for via ads from local businesses. Quite a lot of the ads are from real estate agents, which I think reflects the belief that a lot of tourists are picking up the papers in addition to residents.