Thanks for this somber update about the newspaper trade in the region.

I'm no expert on the newspaper crisis, but as one who straddles the Baby Boom/Gen X divide (depending on whose dates you use), I have a few thoughts about this issue, including some that you haven't raised in your post.

(I'll start by acknowledging my pro-newspaper bias – my family's roots in print journalism go back at least 7 generations from Indiana to California, so I probably have a stronger sentimental attachment to newspapers than most in my generation).

1. I think Johnny Mango is on the money with his observation number 3. A new model seems to be critical for keeping newspapers in business. I have no idea what that might look like.

2. In the past 3-4 years especially, I've noted more reliance on AP stories tweaked to NM sensibilities – I'm getting tired of reading stories I've already read in the WaPo appearing a week later in the Journal. And I realize that part of the reason for this is likely a shortage of staff. I agree with Johnny that there is no shortage of talent on the Journal.

3. For the first time EVER in my adult life, I discontinued my newspaper subscription! My reason for dropping the subscription was not based on content, but on materials. I am tired of feeling qualms of guilt every time I pick up a newspaper and think about the trees and petroleum used to get this product to my home.

I did not make this decision lightly – I spoke with a few environmental scientists and tried to make an informed decision based on the information available. What they (and I) came up with is that reading the paper online is a more ecologically responsible behavior. Many others share this position.(And of course, I'm also open to new evidence, so if you or anyone has different information, please share!)

4. I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim that the post-Boomer generation is not getting their news from newspapers, especially Gen X. I only have anecdotal evidence to support my views, though. In my discussions with my Gen X colleagues we reference the WaPo, NYTimes, London Times and Toronto's Globe and Mail, but we're reading these online. Gawker, The Daily Show, Salon, and Politico also figure into the mix, as do the Economist, Foreign Affairs, and The Nation. My colleagues are probably more educated than most, but we are still reading the news.

There may be a sharper difference inside generations regarding who reads newspapers and who does not; I suspect that the number of newspaper readers from Gen X and Gen Y may not be sufficient to sustain the traditional newspaper, but this seems to be a more nuanced claim than what is generally aimed at these generations.

I'm just wondering whether there might be a difference between those who truck in ideas for a living (and who rely heavily on news for their livelihoods) and those for whom news is just another part of daily life. My sense is that the former group (even the young ones) have not abandoned newspapers, though they may have abandoned the paper version of them.

One last anecdote – when I discontinued my subscription to the Journal a few months ago, the two members of my household who were most upset were the teenagers. They lobbied for the print version's return (the Baby Boomer adult in the household picked up the current subscription), and we still all vie with each other for Section B of the morning paper…

Thanks for this somber update about the newspaper trade in the region.

I'm no expert on the newspaper crisis, but as one who straddles the Baby Boom/Gen X divide (depending on whose dates you use), I have a few thoughts about this issue, including some that you haven't raised in your post.

(I'll start by acknowledging my pro-newspaper bias – my family's roots in print journalism go back at least 7 generations from Indiana to California, so I probably have a stronger sentimental attachment to newspapers than most in my generation).

1. I think Johnny Mango is on the money with his observation number 3. A new model seems to be critical for keeping newspapers in business. I have no idea what that might look like.

2. In the past 3-4 years especially, I've noted more reliance on AP stories tweaked to NM sensibilities – I'm getting tired of reading stories I've already read in the WaPo appearing a week later in the Journal. And I realize that part of the reason for this is likely a shortage of staff. I agree with Johnny that there is no shortage of talent on the Journal.

3. For the first time EVER in my adult life, I discontinued my newspaper subscription! My reason for dropping the subscription was not based on content, but on materials. I am tired of feeling qualms of guilt every time I pick up a newspaper and think about the trees and petroleum used to get this product to my home.

I did not make this decision lightly – I spoke with a few environmental scientists and tried to make an informed decision based on the information available. What they (and I) came up with is that reading the paper online is a more ecologically responsible behavior. Many others share this position.(And of course, I'm also open to new evidence, so if you or anyone has different information, please share!)

4. I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim that the post-Boomer generation is not getting their news from newspapers, especially Gen X. I only have anecdotal evidence to support my views, though. In my discussions with my Gen X colleagues we reference the WaPo, NYTimes, London Times and Toronto's Globe and Mail, but we're reading these online. Gawker, The Daily Show, Salon, and Politico also figure into the mix, as do the Economist, Foreign Affairs, and The Nation. My colleagues are probably more educated than most, but we are still reading the news.

There may be a sharper difference inside generations regarding who reads newspapers and who does not; I suspect that the number of newspaper readers from Gen X and Gen Y may not be sufficient to sustain the traditional newspaper, but this seems to be a more nuanced claim than what is generally aimed at these generations.

I'm just wondering whether there might be a difference between those who truck in ideas for a living (and who rely heavily on news for their livelihoods) and those for whom news is just another part of daily life. My sense is that the former group (even the young ones) have not abandoned newspapers, though they may have abandoned the paper version of them.

One last anecdote – when I discontinued my subscription to the Journal a few months ago, the two members of my household who were most upset were the teenagers. They lobbied for the print version's return (the Baby Boomer adult in the household picked up the current subscription), and we still all vie with each other for Section B of the morning paper…

Thanks for this somber update about the newspaper trade in the region.

I'm no expert on the newspaper crisis, but as one who straddles the Baby Boom/Gen X divide (depending on whose dates you use), I have a few thoughts about this issue, including some that you haven't raised in your post.

(I'll start by acknowledging my pro-newspaper bias – my family's roots in print journalism go back at least 7 generations from Indiana to California, so I probably have a stronger sentimental attachment to newspapers than most in my generation).

1. I think Johnny Mango is on the money with his observation number 3. A new model seems to be critical for keeping newspapers in business. I have no idea what that might look like.

2. In the past 3-4 years especially, I've noted more reliance on AP stories tweaked to NM sensibilities – I'm getting tired of reading stories I've already read in the WaPo appearing a week later in the Journal. And I realize that part of the reason for this is likely a shortage of staff. I agree with Johnny that there is no shortage of talent on the Journal.

3. For the first time EVER in my adult life, I discontinued my newspaper subscription! My reason for dropping the subscription was not based on content, but on materials. I am tired of feeling qualms of guilt every time I pick up a newspaper and think about the trees and petroleum used to get this product to my home.

I did not make this decision lightly – I spoke with a few environmental scientists and tried to make an informed decision based on the information available. What they (and I) came up with is that reading the paper online is a more ecologically responsible behavior. Many others share this position.(And of course, I'm also open to new evidence, so if you or anyone has different information, please share!)

4. I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim that the post-Boomer generation is not getting their news from newspapers, especially Gen X. I only have anecdotal evidence to support my views, though. In my discussions with my Gen X colleagues we reference the WaPo, NYTimes, London Times and Toronto's Globe and Mail, but we're reading these online. Gawker, The Daily Show, Salon, and Politico also figure into the mix, as do the Economist, Foreign Affairs, and The Nation. My colleagues are probably more educated than most, but we are still reading the news.

There may be a sharper difference inside generations regarding who reads newspapers and who does not; I suspect that the number of newspaper readers from Gen X and Gen Y may not be sufficient to sustain the traditional newspaper, but this seems to be a more nuanced claim than what is generally aimed at these generations.

I'm just wondering whether there might be a difference between those who truck in ideas for a living (and who rely heavily on news for their livelihoods) and those for whom news is just another part of daily life. My sense is that the former group (even the young ones) have not abandoned newspapers, though they may have abandoned the paper version of them.

One last anecdote – when I discontinued my subscription to the Journal a few months ago, the two members of my household who were most upset were the teenagers. They lobbied for the print version's return (the Baby Boomer adult in the household picked up the current subscription), and we still all vie with each other for Section B of the morning paper…

Thanks for this somber update about the newspaper trade in the region.

I'm no expert on the newspaper crisis, but as one who straddles the Baby Boom/Gen X divide (depending on whose dates you use), I have a few thoughts about this issue, including some that you haven't raised in your post.

(I'll start by acknowledging my pro-newspaper bias – my family's roots in print journalism go back at least 7 generations from Indiana to California, so I probably have a stronger sentimental attachment to newspapers than most in my generation).

1. I think Johnny Mango is on the money with his observation number 3. A new model seems to be critical for keeping newspapers in business. I have no idea what that might look like.

2. In the past 3-4 years especially, I've noted more reliance on AP stories tweaked to NM sensibilities – I'm getting tired of reading stories I've already read in the WaPo appearing a week later in the Journal. And I realize that part of the reason for this is likely a shortage of staff. I agree with Johnny that there is no shortage of talent on the Journal.

3. For the first time EVER in my adult life, I discontinued my newspaper subscription! Another adult in my household (of the Baby Boomer generation) picked it up again. My reason for dropping the subscription was not based on content, but on materials. I am tired of feeling qualms of guilt every time I pick up a newspaper and think about the trees and petroleum used to get this product to my home. I did not make this decision lightly – I spoke with a few environmental scientists and tried to make an informed decision based on the information I gathered and was given. What they (and I) came up with is that reading the paper online is a more ecologically responsible behavior. I know many share this position.(And of course, I'm also open to new evidence, so if you or anyone has different information, please share!)

4. I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim that the post-Boomer generation is not getting their news from newspapers, especially Gen X. I only have anecdotal evidence to support my views, though. In my discussions with my Gen X colleagues we reference the WaPo, NYTimes, London Times and Toronto's Globe and Mail, but we're reading these online. Gawker, The Daily Show, Salon, and Politico also figure into the mix, as do the Economist, Foreign Affairs, and The Nation. My colleagues are probably more educated than most, but we are still reading the news.

So this leads me to another question – when you say “Young Americans are getting their news from Comedy Central…” are you making a general claim about a specific generation, such as Gen Y? Or is it a claim about how the average American is getting news today? Such as, in the past, most Americans across the board got their news from newspapers, and today most Americans get “news” from a comedy show? There may be a sharper difference today inside generations regarding who reads news from newspapers and who does not, and I suspect that the number of newspaper readers from Gen X and Gen Y may not be sufficient to sustain the traditional newspaper, but this seems to be a more nuanced claim than what is generally aimed at these generations.

One last anecdote – when I discontinued my subscription to the Journal a few months ago, the two members of my household who were most upset were the teenagers. They lobbied for the print version's return, and we still all vie with each other for Section B of the morning paper…

I'm just wondering whether there might be a difference between those who truck in ideas for a living (and who rely heavily on news for their livelihoods) and those for whom news is just another part of daily life. My sense is that the former group (even the young ones) have not abandoned newspapers, though they may have abandoned the paper version of them.

There was an intelligent discussion on NM In Focus this evening hosted by Gene Grant. One of the thoughts that was expressed was that information on sports, entertainment, financial stories, etc. can be obtained quite easily on the web. It was mentioned that denizens of the web expect that all of this stuff should forever be free. They won't pay for it. The problem is that the great reporters that do hard news reporting can't be expected to work for free, and ad revenues aren't there. No consensus on what the right business model will be, but there is a real question about wether the generation that gets its “news” from Jon Stewart, or Jay Leno would even care if newspapers disappeared completely.
local TV news reporting is a joke – except for some good investigative reporting once in awhile. (If I see one more stupid “last minute shopping” story, I'll just leave the thing off)

Most of the great newspapers are in trouble. Even the New York Times is losing advertising revenue at an alarming rate. I have no idea where this is all headed, but 300 million people even less informed then they are now is a frightening thought.

This does not sound like the current ownership.

Journalism 101: How to run a Liberal newspaper
Journalism 102: You want fries with that?