Newspapers Commit Suicide
I looked for coverage of the UCLA game in the three Sunday morning newspapers that I read in ink on paper. I didn't expect to find results and analysis in the New York Times. They, after all, have to be put to bed on East Coast time. I did expect the Los Angeles Times and our own Daily News to be able to stay up till a little after half past ten on a Saturday night. Hey, it's Saturday night! I was disappointed. Our own Daily News at least covered the first half, had pictures and intelligent reporting. The LA Times just kind of admitted that it was too late for them. Yawn.
The issue is not the UCLA game. This incident is only one example of the kind of decisions that are rapidly rendering ink on paper obsolete, not just to a new generation raised on the Net's expectation of instant information, but also deeply alienating to my generation--the last loyal purchasers of dead trees schlepped to driveways. It may be true that ink on paper has no long-term future, but neither does the short-term look good if your loyal customers are underserved and disappointed.
Yes, I know that printing presses have to be shared and that some printing plants have been shuttered. I know there are problems, but you cannot save a product by making it worse. Newspapers cannot compete on speed. Virtually no one who cares about an event--be it sports, entertainment or politics--depends of newspapers for the news. We know how the game turned out, the star's drug test came in and the election results. We grab the paper to understand the context, pick up the nuances and get intelligent and entertaining analyses.
Papers cannot be instant but they have to be timely. Going to bed before 11 on a Saturday evening wastes all the money saved by closing printing plants. What demographic reads the LA Times more than the West Side and the Valley?
The news judgment and economic judgment of our two dailies is utterly unacceptable to the loyal subscribers and self-destructive for the industry and shareholders.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
I'm not sure what version of the LA Times you were reading, but the LA Times delivered to my westside address on Sunday morning also covered the first half of the UCLA game (just like the Daily News based on your statement). Doesn't change your overall point, but I thought you should at least acknowledge that there are lots of versions of the paper, even among the morning delivery versions.