State Of News Media Survey: Things Are Bleak In Journalism

NEW YORK — The state of journalism is bleak, but an annual study of the industry suggests all hope should not be lost.

While the business model of many news organizations appears to be fracturing, there's little indication that consumers are losing interest in news, says the Project for Excellence in Journalism. Its sixth annual State of the News Media survey was released on Sunday.

Four newspaper companies have sought bankruptcy protection in recent months, and the Rocky Mountain News in Denver stopped publication.

Yet The New York Times and Washington Post have bigger audiences than ever, when online readership is taken into account, said Tom Rosenstiel, project director. Traffic to the top 50 online news sites rose by 27 percent in 2008, the report said.

"This is not an industry that is dying," Rosenstiel said. "This is an industry that is in disorientation."

Local television news also is in trouble. Revenues fell by 7 percent in 2008, which is eye-opening considering it was an election year and stations typically see an influx in political advertising.

Besides the Internet, cable news was a sector that flourished, due in large part to its focus on the presidential election, the report said.

Newspapers have failed to figure out how to make their Web sites profitable, Rosenstiel said. They're slow to realize that people aren't going to pay for content in the way they do for traditional newspapers.

Story continues below

advertisement

But there are still things that can be tried, he said. They could try something modeled after the cable industry, where a fee to news producers is built into a customer's monthly fee for Internet service. They could set up online "malls" for local merchants or create specialized services for information that some in their communities might pay for.

Partnerships have been born because of the tough financial times, such as local television affiliates of NBC and Fox sharing video for breaking news events, the report said.

With layoffs prevalent, power is shifting to individual journalists away from institutions, he said.

Journalists are trying different ways of getting their work out, with Web sites such as MinnPost for arts coverage in Minneapolis. Globalpost.com pays a small fee to keep journalists working across the world.

"The news audience is out there and is in some way growing," Rosenstiel said. "If the industry cannot find a way to monetize that, it may be that individual journalists and others will."

___

On the Net:

Excellence in Journalism: http://www.journalism.org/

Comments

[newyorkid]

I see the newspaper industry a little bit like the music industry. Save some exceptions like editorials, commentary, and some specific local news, most of the news published by newspapers are recycled or re-elaborated "news agency" news. So for the most part newspapers are like record companies, That is the intermediary between the news agency and the final client/reader. In the newspaper case, the medium is paper. With the Internet, more and more people is getting there news from medium other than paper. So the only possible solution is to work with the new rules of the new medium. In the case of Internet and the blogosphere, there are some advantages and some disadvantages. The disadvantage is that nobody is going to pay you $1 a day for the "paper". The advantage is that you can specialize. First get news to sell to all the outlets effectively becoming a news agency. At the same time, thanks to the adaptability of digital technology you can create, a web of news outlets tailor made to the final reader or client. Brought to the extreme, since every click is a source of critical feedback about readers interest, I can see the day where you can make an algorithm that produces a tailor made webpage for the reader, like a sophisticated personalized Google news. What's clear is that the paper as a medium is expensive and rigid for the new information world.

[newyorkid]

There was a famous song titled "Video kiIIed the radio star" which erroneously predicted the VCR would wipe out the radio industry. Well, someone could predict that the Internet would wipe out MSM and make a song titled "Blogging kiIIed the MSM propagandist".

[VACommonSense]

I've given up on local late TV news for this simple fact - 9 times out of 10, the lead story is about who was murdered that day. And while this is a horrible tragedy for the person and families involved, and my prayers and thoughts go out to them, I'm not all convinced that in a metro area of more than 3 million people, that this is the most important story for the entire viewing area. I don't really believe that there's nothing else as important to the vast majority of people in the metropolitan region.

[Maxiesid]

Journalism? Where? Just this morning .. MSNBC Headlines "AIG's turmoil depletes Obama's political capital" then you read the article where there is not one fact to support the headline, so, more wishful thinking and blatant manipulation by the Rupert Murdoch School of propaganda. New York Times reports over the weekend "Administration open to taxing health care benefits' you read the article- it turns out that the republicans and some democrats support it, but Obama already said no. But fully half of the article is about how Obama campaigned against it and could face serious repercussions if he considers it. A sentence in the article "The advertisements did not point out that Mr. McCain, in exchange, wanted to give all families a tax credit to subsidize the purchase of coverage." shows that the article is another Murdoch attempt to manipulate the readers. And you want to SAVE these 'news' outlets? They are doing this to themselves and are ramping up the speed of their demise with their disrespect of their readers intelligence.

[newyorkid]

Very good comment. The last time I watched TV, except for sporadic quick 5 minute "news" was 2001. Now I don't even get to see the titles since most of the news titles looks like paid advertisement (they call it PR, public relations) by one lobby or another. My only source of news is the Internet.

[lynettema]

I don't know if I am the norm or not, but I have given up my newspapers because
1. - The ones in my state pander to the right.
2.- Customer service is gone
3. - Newpapers are filled with inserts.
4. - I find more facts on the Internet!

[TeeLolly]

All hope should not be lost if you call the canned tripe they're putting out these days "journalism" ...

[an observer3]

I stopped watching the news and reading newspapers about seven years ago when I realized that they weren't reporting anything worthwhile. I usually surf the web to get information of what's happening in the world around me.

[booboo111]

Newspapers are somewhat passe, but coming from the boomer generation, there's nothing more enjoyable than reading the morning (especially Sunday) paper over a good cup of coffee. Online news can never replace that.

[carallen]

Agreed and I'm GenX.

[Judyisacutie]

What you do is you set up an internet news consortium. That way we're not paying separate fees to each newspaper but one fee to read the second paragraph of any major newspaper in a particular region. Maybe operating through a content distribution company could solve the problem.

[AnnfromCA]

Just write decent articles and then charge the blogs for reproducing them.

[newyorkid]

That's right. Eliminate the record company as an intermediate between the artist and the listener.

[Buffyboy]

Business model of News Organizations? That's the whole problem.

[beaupritchard]

Actually Huffpost and Stewart have shown a way for journalism to resurrect itself. Speak truth to power. Quit trying to kiss everyones but . Stop cowering in the corner and trying to be fair and balanced rather than providers and purveyors of objective truth.

[newyorkid]

Half agree. Yes H.Post has shown a way. H.Post also has its political leaning. Anyway, I'm looking for a H.Post without c_ensorship on the forums. Any ideas?

[canuckgirl]

I am not impressed with any mainstream media as they often hide the real facts.

Does the real story of electroshock that always causes brain damage get any main press, no - because electroshock is still a very controversial subject and the real truth about this brain damaging so called treatment is suppressed by the press.

As well as many poverty issues as well.

Yellow journalism I call it at best.

Go to alternative press and media to get the real facts about real issues.

Huffingtonpost.com needs to up the anti and get to real facts and issues now.

Put in the media the truth that needs to be be told.

Disability issues, psychiatric patient oppression and human rights violations, poverty issues written by poor people, not by people who never experienced poverty.

The integrity in mainstream media has died a long time ago.

We all know it and say little about it.

Say what is on your mind and do it now.

The internet is being curbed for users in Australia.

Check it out, check it out now!

Freedom of speech is hidden in mainstream press and media.

Got no time for it at all. I read it and then shrug it off as being
yellow journalism at its best!

Alternative media looks great to me right now.

I want to know the truth about real issues in real time.

That is all I have to say.

Huffingtonpost.com step up to plate now!

[Graham Strouse]

Good point. HuffPo DOES need to step up to the plate. But to do that they're going to have to borrow a little from the good Mr. Stewart & yes, traditional journalism. Be amusing without being brash. Research first, write second. Contextualize. Separate news from opinion. Leave trash news to bloggers. Channel Katherine Graham, Arianna. She knew what it was about.

[Humbert]

I am so sick of the minute-by-minute reporting about Wall Street and the Dow's rising and falling, or of Obama's first 100 days and the climate crisis that I've stopped watching news. This is not news anymore, but our way of life. We all know this stuff now. And the Campbell Browns of the world? How on earth did that idiot land a six-figure gig speaking about things? Even Keith Olbermann, of whom I've been a fan for a long time, blows hard about Bill O'Reilly more than anything else... funny, yes, but news? Not so much. When did other newscasters become news? Folks who don't watch Bill O'Reilly don't need to be told, daily, what a putz he is. We're already not watching him. And the Huff Post? Same problem... daily headlines larger than God announcing the minute-by-minute fluctuations of the market with photos of weary traders and opinion-infused columns about the Palins and the fall of the GOP. These things might be newsy one day, but not forever. Get creative, get curious, find stories that can't be predicted the day before, and get over yourselves and your opinions and consider informing us rather than telling us.

[destruct1]

uh...yeah.­..gee maybe...uh start with TRUE stories and factually accurate full statements. All news is now TABLOID at best.

[Hank10303]

The article is our of touch. We the people are loosing interest in the news media. We are not loosing interest in the news but the news media. We don't like being feed lies to make us believe what you want us to. We don't like not being given information that would alter a negative or positive impression we may have because you want to get better ratings. We don't want news reports that are actually summary statements from political sources. We don't want opinions being passed off as fact. We want the facts - delievered in an informed and sincere way - without bias. We don't want Campbell Brown, the Fox Noise team, Rivera, Dobbs, Coulter and all the other liers. We want investigative, factual reporting. CAN YOU DO THAT?

[RobinSeattle]

It's spelled "losing."

[RobinSeattle]

One solution to the image problems of journalism these days is to rid it of d o u c he b a gs like
Jon King, Geraldo Rivera, Jon Stossel, David Gregory and Katie Couric. None of those featherweight dopes can be taken seriously by any thinking person and they aren't the only ones of their type in the media, unfortunately. It is like a plague right now. Right now it is like we are on the moon in terms of media gravitas. That is, many of today's reporters and commentators have 1/6 the gravitas of their predecessors.