While chatting with a friend who works for a newspaper they said that the last paper they worked for wasn't that hip on that internet stuff. My friend suggested that they start to put breaking news online. The paper didn't think this was such a good idea since the stories would be in the print edition the next day.
I remarked, that's not breaking news, that's broken news.
Visitor Comments
Tbo.com does a good job with breaking news headlines. That's a good teaser for what to read tomorrow.
All I have time for at work is to glance at the headlines online to see if a plane crashed in my neighborhood or if it's going to rain on the way home. If I want to know more information, I can wait for the print edition.
Newspapaers have heard the pitches from consultants about how the Internet is driving change, if the newspapers won't listen, they won't last.
Posted by: Greg Hoffman | February 1, 2007 3:13 PM
But aren't there quite a few newspapers that have been lasting for years despite their willingness to listen?
I can only pray that your prediction comes true.
Quickly.
Posted by: excruciatingly | February 1, 2007 6:44 PM
Er...I meant UNwillingness to listen. Sorry.
Posted by: excruciatingly | February 1, 2007 6:45 PM
Not all newspapers (or newspaper companies) have this view. But there's still a lot more that needs to be done with regard to differentiation of print and online content.
Posted by: chris | February 1, 2007 8:48 PM
It's tough to change that mindset, but it's breaking news that drives Web traffic. The old thinking that you have to save stories for the print product just won't fly anymore. You break a story when it breaks, whether it's 9 a.m. or 2 p.m. or midnight.
Some newspapers are getting this. We still have some holdouts at my place, but the numbers are hard to argue with.
Posted by: ryan | February 1, 2007 11:10 PM
I saw a cartoon in yesterday's WSJ, print edition, that said "Breaking News, no wait, the bloggers already have it, nevermind."
Posted by: Greg Hoffman | February 2, 2007 6:46 AM
I can't help but wonder whether or not the use of blogs and internet for newspapers and PR work is going to wipe out the need for written publications. Are we going to become too independent on getting quick information from the internet?
Posted by: dixiepeach | February 3, 2007 12:25 AM
I wish I still had the link, but there was a story about how the WSJ was changing the entire focus of their print and web editions by putting the breaking news on the web, and analysis reporting (read: not timely) in the print edition.
Also, to me, I don't think of newspapers as "newspaper companies." They're sharers of media. And just because today they share it on paper doesn't mean in five years they won't be sharing it in/on another medium, in my opinion. I hope they feel the same way.
Posted by: Mark Baratelli | February 3, 2007 9:09 AM