Comments on: Statistical evidence: many newspaper execs not seeing reality

By: Newspapers: A message from users in 68-foot tall flaming numbers

Newspapers: A message from users in 68-foot tall flaming numbers — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:32:29 +0000

[...] Outing highlighted a statistic that should give news executives and journalists pause. As Steve points out: …the graphic shows that 75% of newspaper execs believe that if their [...]

By: Clyde Bentley

Clyde Bentley — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:45:26 +0000

The state of the individual market could change this rather dramatically. In a metro area or even a suburb, readers indeed could find local news on other local Websites. But for the hundreds of small-town dailies and thousands of weeklies, this is often not the case.

In many, many towns the local paper is the only medium to do actual reporting. Radio, distant TV and Websites pick up their news and repurpose it, but don’t send reporters to city council.

The question might better be whether readers will go to the newspaper site if no other local copy is available or whether they would just skip the local news. My guess is that compelling and rare information is salable while the common and dull generates no loyalty.

Clyde Bentley
Reynolds Journalism Institute

By: Midwest Newspaper Summit provides diverse views on challenges and future « Pursuing the Complete Community Connection

Sat, 19 Sep 2009 23:10:36 +0000

[...] study conducted for API by Belden Interactive and ITZ Publishing. The most stark findings were the huge disconnect between what publishers and the public thought. Publishers (68 percent) thought people would [...]

By: links for 2009-09-16 — contentious.com

links for 2009-09-16 — contentious.com — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 14:04:00 +0000

[...] Statistical evidence: many newspaper execs not seeing reality: SteveOuting.com "75% of newspaper execs believe that if their content were no longer available on their website, online users would foremost turn to the print edition of the newspaper. Meanwhile, only 30% of online news users said they would turn to the print edition in such a case; the No. 1 choice (at 68% of respondents to a 2009 Belden survey) was to look to “other local media sites.” [...]

By: The Cognitive Mismatch Between Newspaper Execs And Newspaper Readers | PHP Hosts

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 06:46:56 +0000

[...] and some recent research (highlighted by Steve Outing) suggests that many newspaper execs have a stunningly large disconnect between how they think readers will react to paywalls, and how readers themselves actually say [...]

By: links for 2009-09-15 « Sarah Hartley

links for 2009-09-15 « Sarah Hartley — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:03:04 +0000

[...] Statistical evidence: many newspaper execs not seeing reality: SteveOuting.com I find much evidence that newspaper leaders remain delusional about how charging for online content (some or all) is going to become such a big revenue stream that it will save them. Below is the slide that just screamed out at me the main problem: Newspaper executives are out of touch with the online audience to a huge degree. (tags: journalism newspapers business online paywall) [...]

By: Notes from a Teacher - Tuesday squibs

Notes from a Teacher - Tuesday squibs — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:31:39 +0000

[...] Statistical evidence: many newspaper execs not seeing reality. Steve Outing takes a look at the delusion of newspaper execs. A short post, but it says a lot. Related: Glass Half Full? 51 Percent Of Newspaper Publishers Believe Charging For Online Content Can Succeed at Paid Content. [...]

By: Matt Busse

Matt Busse — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:25:58 +0000

I agree that fewer readers are likely to turn to the print edition than publishers would like to think. However, I imagine a similar mindset exists in many other industries: Ask Honda dealers how many of their customers would buy a new Honda if their old one died, and the percentage is likely to be far greater than reality.

Is this being “delusional,” or is it simply expressing confidence in your product? Does that confidence actually translate into poor business sense, as the study may suggest (and as some people who read it are flat-out saying)?

Moving on, thoughts and questions:

- Is 118 a statistically significant sample of newspaper executives? I am not a statistician, so I would be curious to hear others’ thoughts on this.

- Were those who believe in the power of pay walls more likely to answer the survey and therefore skew the results – i.e., are the opinions expressed by publishers in this survey indicative of all publishers?

- Following up on earlier comments: In slide 25, 68% of visitors say they would turn to “other local Internet sites” rather than “other local media sites” (17%). However, in the next slide, when asked what sites visitors would turn to, “local TV station sites” and “other area newspaper sites” were the two top-ranked choices. This suggests that respondents to the question shown in slide 25 answered “other local Internet sites” when they meant “other local media sites.” The wording is a bit confusing.

- I did not hear the actual presentation; I am only reading the slides and follow-up articles, so perhaps this was better explained in the presentation, but — I am somewhat dismayed that “obsession with ‘credibility’ and professional” is listed alongside apparently negative attributes (slide 48). Why would making sure your content is credible and professional be a bad thing?

…All in all, very interesting reading and thank you Steve for writing about it!

Matt Busse

By: Statistical evidence: many newspaper execs not seeing reality auf Hundertfünfzig Worte

Tue, 15 Sep 2009 06:39:46 +0000

[...] Steve Outing. And concludes: Wow. That pretty much says it all. Many newspapers are doomed without management [...]

By: Steve Outing

Steve Outing — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 05:14:28 +0000

Thanks for pointing that out, Cliff. That is odd wording on the survey. Main point still stands, though: Most online users would look to other websites before going to print newspaper edition, while most newspaper execs expect them to go to print. (Question allowed multiple answers.)