4 ms·
“The notion that the enormous cost of real news-gathering might be supported by the ad load of display advertising down the side of the page, or by the revenue
by Jasber 18y ago
“The notion that the enormous cost of real news-gathering might be supported by the ad load of display advertising down the side of the page, or by the revenue share from having a Google search box in the corner of the page, or even by a 15-second teaser from Geico prior to a news clip, is idiotic on its face.”
The notion that newspapers are still spending money on multi-million dollar presses and bloated newsrooms is what's really idiotic.
- gabrielroth 18y agoEvidence that newsrooms are bloated, please.
- Jasber 18y agoBy bloated I mean local newspapers covering national news. When small papers have newsrooms with 60 reporters, and 40% of those reporters cover national news--that's a problem. To see evidence of this go look at your local paper. Mine writes about (not syndicates...writes) national news all of the time. Small to medium sized papers shouldn't be doing this anymore. They should be focusing on their local communities and dominating that market. By bloat I mean purchasing multi-million dollar printing presses in 2005 (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-108017775.html http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-108017775.html) when you should be investing heavily in your local and online markets.
- brandnewlow 18y agoThere are some claims here I'd still like links to backup. Show me a "small" paper with 60 reporters. Show me a "small" paper with 25 reporters covering national news. Your local paper has 40% of its reporters covering national news?