Knowing When to Say When (to say “Stop the presses”)
Jon Fine, writing on the Business Week website in an essay entitled “When Do You Stop The Presses?” asks a hypothetical question: “Which major American newspaper should be the first to throw up its hands and stop publishing a print product?” (I assume the question is hypothetical; who knows, maybe somebody asked him.) His question arises from the current state of the newspaper industry, which has taken numerous hits due to the Internet. Writes Fine: “This could be the worst year for newspapers since the Great Depression. The double-digit revenue declines long forecast by doomsters have arrived. While nearly all the major papers still post profits, albeit smaller than before, a few prominent ones are losing boatloads.”
Because of this, Fine thinks that enough is enough and — with no upward trend in sight — at least a couple of major American newspapers (“not today, but within the next 18 or 24 months”) should cease printing a physical edition. His prime candidate for printhanasia? The San Francisco Chronicle. Why? Fine thinks that Chronicle’s website, sfgate.com, would be better served if it didn’t have the print counterpart. “With [an] unassailable market position, excellent editorial, and massive traffic—[the website] will be worth more as a solo digital play than attached to a print newspaper.”
Of course, in the magazine world, many media companies already have killed the magazine but kept the website. (However, last week Jane Magazine — aimed at young women — was killed all together, both the print edition and the website.) But this model, in place for the past few years in terms of magazines and some smaller publications, may now be spreading to the world of newspapers. Such moves would prove that, in the “print is dead” debate, printers have the most to fear. After all, Fine and others aren’t saying that newspapers, magazines or books should go away. Instead, what’s happening is that the physical products which are too costly to produce, and some times difficult for people to obtain, should be killed off in favor of less expensive, more interactive websites.
1 Comment so far
Leave a reply
Everyone in the printing business is in denial right now. I expect that the last printer in existence will say “Print dead? Not on your life! It’s stronger than ever!” as he shuts off the lights, shutters the windows, and locks the door, with an OUT OF BUSINESS sign in his front window. Really though - what would you expect him and his associates to say?
Newspaper people are beginning to realize that their product is not the physical ink-on-newsprint paper, but rather, it’s *the content*. The paper itself is just a method of delivery of that product. The emphasis should be on the “news” part of the word newspaper - that’s what’s really being sold here.
I was in the printing business for many years as a skilled craftsman (back when it was still a real craft)and went through the final glory days of it. It was great work to have, know, and perform, but things change. Gone are the days when you would see a Photoshop guru, or Illustrator guru, etc. in your local printing company. That’s all done digitally now with lower-cost PCs and publishing software, and it’s being done by the clients themselves mostly. I’ve had people now and then ask me if I’d ever consider getting back into printing/publishing, and I usually tell them no, there’s really not much to go back to anymore. Not like before anyway. Prepress (which is what I was in) is a good example. A skilled prepress worker might have been able to get $20+ an hour for his skills and knowledge. Today someone can hire a computer jockey (usually a kid just out of school) for maybe $12 an hour, who doesn’t really need to know much about how something is actually printed. If I were a younger man just starting out, and I wanted to get into graphics and the graphic arts, I’d probably want to become a web designer.