The SLP website lists 6 Editorial staff, 6 Advertising staff and 7 others, seems a big overhead.
When I first got involved with the Mercury, it had four reporters and a sub-editor for each of the Lewisham, Greenwich and Bexley boroughs, a news editor, an editor, a sports editor and part-time sports reporter, plus a small army of contributors like Kevin Nolan and Steve Waggott. There was also an art department, two photographers, plus regular freelancers, offices with receptionists at Deptford, Woolwich and Bexleyheath, and an army of ad sales people. That was 1989 and it contracted pretty sharply over the following years - Trinity Mirror then bought it in 1996 and started to merge the operation with the SLP.
Different world in terms of advertising then and maybe that model was generous, with no online back then, but people produce newspapers. The fact what's left has very few staff has helped dragged the quality of the papers down and the SLP's paid circulation with it, although I think Rich does a great job to be fair.
Papers produced in partnership with clubs or by local authorities don't often ask difficult questions. It's a slippery slope which removes accountability and ends, at its most extreme, in Grenfell Tower. It is not a good thing and not just for football fans.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
The model doesn't stack up though. Advertisers don't even need to be on news sites because they can go elsewhere. Most of the news content online comes from print publications or the BBC which is underpinned by print sales or the licence fee. I don't use the Independent much but what I see of it is clickbait on Twitter. Local websites like the Shopper's and, especially, the KM's are doing the same. Not knocking the individuals concerned as that's their job, but it's distorted journalism.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
The model doesn't stack up though. Advertisers don't even need to be on news sites because they can go elsewhere. Most of the news content online comes from print publications or the BBC which is underpinned by print sales or the licence fee. I don't use the Independent much but what I see of it is clickbait on Twitter. Local websites like the Shopper's and, especially, the KM's are doing the same. Not knocking the individuals concerned as that's their job, but it's distorted journalism at best.
Do you really think though that anyone under the age of 20 will be looking to buy a printed newspaper ever ? I've just asked my daughter (age 27) and she said that she's only ever bought about five in her life. She gets all the news she wants through her phone.
I accept that most of the online news outlets are versions of the printed but I'm convinced that there will be no market for them in ten years.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
The model doesn't stack up though. Advertisers don't even need to be on news sites because they can go elsewhere. Most of the news content online comes from print publications or the BBC which is underpinned by print sales or the licence fee. I don't use the Independent much but what I see of it is clickbait on Twitter. Local websites like the Shopper's and, especially, the KM's are doing the same. Not knocking the individuals concerned as that's their job, but it's distorted journalism at best.
Do you really think though that anyone under the age of 20 will be looking to buy a printed newspaper ever ? I've just asked my daughter (age 27) and she said that she's only ever bought about five in her life. She gets all the news she wants through her phone.
I accept that most of the online news outlets are versions of the printed but I'm convinced that there will be no market for them in ten years.
That's not really my point. Newspapers as a concept have progressively been in trouble in this country since about the 1970s, but we haven't found a model that does the same job independently of them.
We can all retreat into an online world where we see the news and views that we want, but the ecology of that world won't produce the news that matters. So we will all be worse off.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
The model doesn't stack up though. Advertisers don't even need to be on news sites because they can go elsewhere. Most of the news content online comes from print publications or the BBC which is underpinned by print sales or the licence fee. I don't use the Independent much but what I see of it is clickbait on Twitter. Local websites like the Shopper's and, especially, the KM's are doing the same. Not knocking the individuals concerned as that's their job, but it's distorted journalism at best.
Do you really think though that anyone under the age of 20 will be looking to buy a printed newspaper ever ? I've just asked my daughter (age 27) and she said that she's only ever bought about five in her life. She gets all the news she wants through her phone.
I accept that most of the online news outlets are versions of the printed but I'm convinced that there will be no market for them in ten years.
That's not really my point. Newspapers as a concept have progressively been in trouble in this country since about the 1970s, but we haven't found a model that does the same job independently of them.
We can all retreat into an online world where we see the news and views that we want, but the ecology of that world won't produce the news that matters. So we will all be worse off.
I tend to disagree that the end of printed copy will spell the end of quality journalism. Certainly how we see that news will be different and perhaps will require the reader to be more discerning with what they read and what they believe but I can't subscribe to the idea that things will be worse. Different perhaps.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
The model doesn't stack up though. Advertisers don't even need to be on news sites because they can go elsewhere. Most of the news content online comes from print publications or the BBC which is underpinned by print sales or the licence fee. I don't use the Independent much but what I see of it is clickbait on Twitter. Local websites like the Shopper's and, especially, the KM's are doing the same. Not knocking the individuals concerned as that's their job, but it's distorted journalism.
The Independent's twitter clickbait approach seems off brand to me. Really disappointing.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
The model doesn't stack up though. Advertisers don't even need to be on news sites because they can go elsewhere. Most of the news content online comes from print publications or the BBC which is underpinned by print sales or the licence fee. I don't use the Independent much but what I see of it is clickbait on Twitter. Local websites like the Shopper's and, especially, the KM's are doing the same. Not knocking the individuals concerned as that's their job, but it's distorted journalism.
The Independent's twitter clickbait approach seems off brand to me. Really disappointing.
I think there's part of the problem. Quality or otherwise journalism costs money. Without adds and without a paying readership who actually pays for the journalist ? Perhaps there will be a relatively small group of people willing to pay a subscription to get the news and the readership goes online. Not sure enough people will to make it fully self paying. There's always going to be the loan blogger but like much of the Internet how can you be sure what's being written is credible. Fascinating situation.
Comments
The SLP website lists 6 Editorial staff, 6 Advertising staff and 7 others, seems a big overhead.
Different world in terms of advertising then and maybe that model was generous, with no online back then, but people produce newspapers. The fact what's left has very few staff has helped dragged the quality of the papers down and the SLP's paid circulation with it, although I think Rich does a great job to be fair.
Papers produced in partnership with clubs or by local authorities don't often ask difficult questions. It's a slippery slope which removes accountability and ends, at its most extreme, in Grenfell Tower. It is not a good thing and not just for football fans.
I wouldn't and couldn't disagree with any of that but I think that newspapers in the traditional printed form will be gone within the next decade. That's not to say that quality journalism and productions will cease and awkward questions will disappear. It's just that the way people will choose to take their news will be online. It will be truly local news that suffers but there is a market for news out there but just no future for paper versions.
I accept that most of the online news outlets are versions of the printed but I'm convinced that there will be no market for them in ten years.
How would you know otherwise what Kylie from Kettering, topic of the day is.
We can all retreat into an online world where we see the news and views that we want, but the ecology of that world won't produce the news that matters. So we will all be worse off.