Why Newspapers Are Failing
Posted: Sunday, December 07, 2008
by John Waddey
firstcenturychristian
Across America newspapers are in trouble. Many are in poor health and some have died. To me, a lifelong reader of my daily newspaper, this is a sad situation. It is true the Internet and television have played a role in this decline, but there are other factors as well.
* America's educational system is failing to graduate students who are capable readers. The several million functional illiterates we read about do not read newspapers.
* The editorial pages of most newspapers seem to be dominated by writers with liberal social, moral and political views. The assumption seems to be that all Americans are either liberal or they are so naive they won't recognize that they are being fed a diet of liberal thought. The fact is, a good half the population is conservative. Even among those who vote Democrat, many are still conservative in their social, moral and religious values.
* Most papers seem to think that their readers want a steady diet of what's wrong with America and how sorry our president is. The editors, reporters and pundits may think that way, but large numbers of their readers don't share their cynical anti-American point of view.
* The primary purpose of newspapers seems to be to wrap around the reams of advertising included therein. Many days it is easily two thirds advertising and one third reading material; occasionally, even less. The cost of subscriptions is up and the content is down. I don't enjoy paying for a bunch of adds that I don't care for.
For over 50 years I have read the daily paper as I have eaten my breakfast. I am beginning to wonder if the industry will last long enough for me to finish my earthly journey. To survive, the crew of a sinking ship must do more than bail water. They must fix the problem. Publishers and editors must do the same.
This Article has been viewed 132 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (3 total)Yeah John. It's those darn liberals that a causing the demise of the newspapers. Just like they a messing with our gun laws, religion, homeless friends, sexual deviants and other horrific stuff. Go online and look at my home-grown newspapers, the Arizona Republic and Scottsdale Tribune, and tell me if you think that they happen to be liberal - don't I wish! People don't have the money John, and can get the non-murderous version of the news by clicking on their mouse.Dear James, I have read the Arizona Republic every day for 10 years. Yes, it is now in the hands of a liberal staff. True, they feature a few conservatives on the op-ed page, but the overall philosophy and thrust is toward liberalism. You do not have to be as skewed as the New York Times to fall into the liberal camp. As to money, the decline of newspapers was evident long before our recession hit us. John
Thanks for this article, John. I don't think the whole issue of why newspapers are failing can be addressed without mentioning the Internet, though. There are many news-related tasks that the Internet allows that can't be done through a newspaper, just like there are things that can be done with newspaper that would be difficult to do online.I think the bottom line is the same as most trends in America: it's about the money. As long as the advertising effectiveness of newspapers continues to decline, the quality and quantity of newspapers will continue to decline. I doubt that it has anything to do with the political views of the editorial staff.I have 3 sons, 18, 15 and 8 years old, who rarely leave for school in the morning without reading at least some portion of the newspaper, but I think this mainly has to do with the environment that they've been raised in. They want to learn as much as they can, and they don't want to be unprepared for any conversations they might have during their day. In the evening, however, you'll find them on the Internet.Hello Bruce: Yes, the Internet has taken its toll. I mentioned that in my article. As to the decline in advertising, think of it this way. If a large paper has a circulation of 500,000 and most papers are read by two or more people, a business can place an ad with the hope that it will reach the hands of a million people. But when readers become disgusted with the reading content of their paper for such reasons as I mentioned above, they quit subscribing. The papers do not reduce the cost of their advertising. So the business man is paying top dollar and reaching half the audience he once reached. Therefore he drops his newspaper ads. I believer that people will still subscribe to and read a paper that offers fair and balanced reporting and editorializing. Propaganda sheets and promotional pieces for ones favorite political candidate and party are doomed for the junk yard. If you are a regular reader of your daily paper, how do you think it compares to the papers you read 20 or 30 years ago? JohnWell, I'm only 40 so I don't remember much about the newspapers I read 20 or 30 years ago. I think my local paper is pretty balanced. Over the years their editorial board has endorsed more conservative candidates than liberal ones. Even still, they are struggling to make ends meet because their readership is dwindling.
In the interest of full disclosure, though, I don't recall ever seeing anything in any newspaper that I would classify as a propaganda sheet.Dear Bruce: Did you not observe the shameful way the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and many other papers conducted themselves in the recent election? They behaved and reported as subservient toadies for Mr. Obama. They have done the same regarding the Military effort in Iraq. They have devoted themselves to the smearing and destruction of President Bush. That is the kind of propagandizing that is so repulsive. John
I have to agree that news print, still a favorite with many old timers, is being pushed to the side by the Internet. That also implies a paper must be more diversified in presenting opinions and news to be able to survive. At 50 cents a copy many just don't buy papers any longer. Hey here they even charge you to trash it. I have to agree with you that depending on the editor or owner their opinions and perspective is what is presented. We are all somewhat tired of these well known columnists who are but mere recordings of corporate and government positions be they liberal or conservative. Now I believe my opinion is correct that bias also continues onto these varied web sites. I do believe this site, while in my opinion serving a mostly upper middle class audience does offer that diversity of opinion and perspective.Robert: Well said. I still say if the paper is filled with timely, interesting and unbiased reporting of serious news....as well as sports, society events, etc. the average citizen can well afford the 50 cents to buy his copy. No one cares to purchase junk with his hard-earned money. John
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.