Derek Thompson
The scariest statistic about the newspaper business today
Since 2003, print ads have fallen from $45 billion to $19 billion. Online ads have only grown from $1.2 to $3.3 billion. Stop and think about that gap. The total ten-year increase in digital advertising isn’t even enough to overcome the average single-year decline in print ads since 2003. Ugh.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
That there’s no “news” in newspapers?
RoadRunner on March 19, 2013 at 6:02 PM
Um, the cost of delivering ads is significantly lower. Nothing wrong with efficiency.
astonerii on March 19, 2013 at 6:02 PM
The MSM sucks.
Blake on March 19, 2013 at 6:04 PM
It’s only scary if you give a damn about newspapers.
Mark1971 on March 19, 2013 at 6:08 PM
Cry me a river, bitches.
squint on March 19, 2013 at 6:10 PM
Report the news, instead of propObama, and you will make money & turn a profit.
22044 on March 19, 2013 at 6:11 PM
And ATMs cost less than bank tellers. Oooo scary.
Ronnie on March 19, 2013 at 6:14 PM
Wow, it’s amazing how much I don’t care. You newspeople made your bed, now burn in them.
squint on March 19, 2013 at 6:14 PM
The purpose of the large papers has little to do with turning a profit.
forest on March 19, 2013 at 6:17 PM
Only if you find laughing scary.
Chuck Schick on March 19, 2013 at 6:19 PM
Attacking the very folks you’re soliciting for advertising ain’t exactly a great business model.
antipc on March 19, 2013 at 6:48 PM
See “Pravda”. Or its US subsidiary, the New York Times.
PBS has a fascinating story today about how the Boston Phoenix, which was that city’s “underground” paper for over 40 years, finally went under. Their problem? They changed over from being a pay newspaper to a free one.
How the Boston Phoenix Kept Its Readers But Lost Its Advertisers
Del Dolemonte on March 19, 2013 at 6:52 PM
I hope they survive. What else would parakeets crap on?
Kensington on March 19, 2013 at 6:59 PM
Evidently, my local paper, The Cincinnati Enquirer, is trying to do its best to lose subscribers with a hard left turn. After a steady descent, ten days ago, it rolled out a new format and started trying new syndicated columnists. Other than the expected Walter Williams column on Sunday (I think it’d lose half its subscribers in a week if it dumped him), it has run Dr. K once offset by David Ignatius twice and E.J. Dione thrice.
The AP reporting and other wire-service reporting is so slanted it belongs in the op-ed pages. One local columnist has spent the past three years introducing us to the most awesomely awesome illegal immigrants.
And with Cincinnati electing its first gay councilman and Portman’s announcement, there’s a steady drumbeat of gay themes. It’s fabulous.
I’m a few weeks from dropping it. The area is pretty Catholic. I’m wondering how long it can keep up the gay-is-awesome theme without considerable blowback.
BuckeyeSam on March 19, 2013 at 7:10 PM
You might be surprised. For example, Hot Air has been running with its own “gay-is-awesome” theme for quite awhile now.
Kensington on March 19, 2013 at 7:13 PM
I used to read the paper every day but I haven’t picked up a newspaper in over 12 years now.
I’m more informed now than then.
Captain Kirock on March 19, 2013 at 7:14 PM
The scariest statistic about the newspaper business today
That is the best news I’ve heard all year!
RJL on March 19, 2013 at 7:41 PM
So what.
Saltysam on March 19, 2013 at 7:54 PM
Can craigslist have sucked up that much in classified advertising?
danielreyes on March 19, 2013 at 8:10 PM