2007 The Worst Year For Newspapers Since 1950

Wall Street Journal   |  Sam Schechner and Emily Steel   |   March 31, 2008 01:09 AM


Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Print-ad revenue at U.S. newspapers last year suffered its biggest decline since at least 1950, the Newspaper Association of America reported, amid signs that conditions in the newspaper industry have worsened so far this year.

Print-ad revenue plummeted 9.4% to $42 billion in 2007, according to an NAA estimate released Friday. Classified ads, which account for a third of the total, were hit especially hard, down almost 17%.

The NAA's estimate showed that while newspapers' online-ad revenue is growing, the extra ad dollars coming from the Internet aren't enough to offset the lost print revenue. Including online revenue, newspapers still saw ad spending fall 7.9% in 2007 -- second only to the 9% decline the NAA reported they experienced in 2001, when the estimate didn't include online revenue.

Read the whole story here.



Comments
9
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:

Where are the comments for this item? I see only Two. It says there are Seven. There are Zero pending. What gives?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 AM on 04/01/2008

Ah, there they are! Thanks!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 AM on 04/01/2008

That is good news. The bad one is that TV channels, like CNN, are as much infested with the neo-conservative spin doctors as the newspapers, and even Google is now becoming a mind control branch of the government.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:20 PM on 03/31/2008

I try to support newspapers. I finally canceled my daily subscription to the Albuquerque Journal last year due to poor delivery service. Now I've been trying since February 18th to get a Sunday only subscription started and only getting frustration. Maybe newspapers are trying to commit suicide?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:57 PM on 03/31/2008

I used to get the paper religiously, mainly for the editorials and the funnies. Now I can get 1000 editorials online and even respond to them and write my own. So I have no interest in my newspaper's 2 columnist. As to the funnies, I've got 1000 entertainment options each day and reading Haggar the Horrible isn't one I choose.

I got hooked on cross-words and sudoku for awhile but still couldn't justify the cost and the disposal of a pile of newsprint. If I want a local story, I go to my paper's web site.

If a local paper wants to survive, they are going to have to find an on-line model that works for them.

And to the local shopper papers who keep throwing their unwanted rags on my lawn, please stop it. There are 2 people on my street that actually read those things. The rest of us have to pick these multi-colored, water soaked pulp piles off our lawns like dog crap.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 AM on 03/31/2008

The WSJ is continuing in its tradition of writing its own obit while it's dying. The newspaper is dying because of changes in the way news is collected, written, edited & distributed. The web allows news to to be updated & distributed almost instantly. Newspapers in 1 paper towns formerly had no incentive to adapt to changes in technology. The flight of the former users of newspapers to the web has driven circulation & advertising down. The ads go to where the users of news go.
This WSJ story reminds one of the stories the WSJ posted as Mr Murdoch bought control off the WSJ & Dow Jones from the family which had controlled the WSJ for a few generations. The facts are treated almost like history. It's almost similar to someone writing a running commentary as a hand is re-attached to their arm.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 03/31/2008

I agree Voter, the only local paper in my area is Bush controlled and hardly worth lining a litter pan. Newspapers are putting themselves out of business by becoming increasingly biased and irrelevant.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 AM on 03/31/2008

Newspapers unwilling to PRINT REAL NEWS should go out of business.

Today's papers have taken the saying "News That's Fit To Print" to mean, only printing

"news/propaganda" approved by the Bush Administration.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:59 AM on 03/31/2008

As a former foreign correspondent back in the 1950s and 60s, I can tell you that the problem of slanted news is not of recent origin.

The public bears some responsibility for the lack of "real news." There is not that much demand for it and the public doesn't always recognize it when it sees it. They have been fed the phony news by the media for so long that they may not realize the difference. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Je pense, donc je suis populiste.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:28 PM on 03/31/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in


 

 Site  Web ask.com