Deprecated: Function add_option was called with an argument that is deprecated since version 2.3.0 with no alternative available. in /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5673

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php:5673) in /home/newspape/public_html/wp-content/plugins/all-in-one-seo-pack/app/Common/Meta/Robots.php on line 87

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php:5673) in /home/newspape/public_html/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Breaking the Mold in Sacramento Chronicling the Decline of Newspapers and the Rebirth of Journalism Sun, 12 Aug 2018 18:04:31 +0000 hourly 1 By: Patch Business Model Flounders | Newspaper Death Watch Thu, 05 Jan 2012 20:53:37 +0000 […] inventing some creative new ways to report the news. We continue to like the business model of Sacramento Press, which positions itself as an integrated marketing partner rather than an advertising outlet. […]

By: Jim Grandone Thu, 27 Jan 2011 05:11:57 +0000 THE SKY IS NOT FALLING
Newspapers are not going anywhere anytime soon. They certainly are not on their deathbed. People in business and people in general will always have the inborn need to know WIGO, What is going on (with apologies to the Coro Leadership Center).
We are curious beings and want to know what affects us in our daily lives, such as the weather, the markets, our favorite sports team. Does anyone really believe that people will log on to 5 or 10 different Web sites to get this information for free? i do not. There is the matter of convenience for the consumer of getting all they want to know in one place at one time and then start their day. This may evolve into a different form in the next generation, but the need to know will not.
As a former daily newspaper reporter, I know that other factors play a role. Young reporters feel and believe they are doing a great service to the community and perhaps the country by doing their job. How else would newspapers get away with paying reporters so little? They are and remain believers and thank God they do because without them and their tenacity and persistence, who would investigate their owners or the government when it breaks the law?

Moreover, we are watching the world be transformed by communications technology. Will the 5 billion people who cannot afford a computer and want to know what is going on want a cheap alternative? Is that not what a newspaper provides the developing world. No, we are not seeing the death of the newspaper, we are witnessing its rebirth and evolution. If only we would step out of our little slice of America and look at the scope of change in the world, we would see this.

Besides, what is Google News going to use as a source for its stories if there are no more newspapers!


P.S. thank you to Steve Rensberry for providing this very useful and informative source of information. It truly is a great service and he deserves kudos for doing it.

By: Sacramento Press Eyes Expansion | Newspaper Death Watch Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:52:17 +0000 […] couple of weeks ago, we profiled Sacramento Press, a bootstrapped startup that appears to be doing a lot of things right, including adopting a […]

By: paulgillin Sun, 07 Nov 2010 14:58:21 +0000 In reply to msbpodcast.

Disagree with you on this. Speech is freer than ever today. It’s a cacophony, but that’s a consequence of freedom.

If 50 people trash your business on Yelp or TripAdvisor, you’re screwed, no matter how much money you spend on marketing. That wasn’t so five years ago. Informed consumers force businesses to be better because the customers can talk directly to each other. Doesn’t matter how much you spend on PR or marketing.

One of the reasons we’re in a deep recession right now is that a lot of inefficiency is being wrung out of the economy as businesses stop spending money on expensive things like marketing and local sourcing and spend much less on customer engagement and offshore sourcing. Efficiency hurts in the short term. In the long term, we’re better off, but we’re in a painful transition point right now.

By: msbpodcast Mon, 25 Oct 2010 13:58:39 +0000 To further obliterate the usefulness of the paper based media comes this NY Times article: Pitching Movies or Filming Shows, Hollywood Is Hooked on iPads.

It clearly shows how a connected media device, such as the iPad, as opposed to a merely interactive one, is superior by virtue of being able to update and to receive updated content, without involving time consuming arboricide.

Imagine a news paper without the paper waste. Imagine an iPad (or iPad like device.) Same thing really.. I have seen the future and it works.

Apps on an iPad, or iPad like device, and subscription to content using the internet (not the Web) for delivery is an inevitable consequence of the advancement of technology.

I could go on about why this novel application of technology came from Apple customers, the creative types who are always playing with devices for their cool factor, and could not (and did not,) come from Microsoft’s traditional customer base, (which had access to this kind of device for years prior to the iPad,) because businesses have specific needs and don’t need or want anything else done on their platforms, but why bother?

By: msbpodcast Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:56:56 +0000 By diversifying their businesses, publishers can insulate themselves from disasters like the current collapse in advertising rates and position themselves as essential partners to local businesses.

That works fine until you realize that most companies, the clients of such media companies, would sell absolute crap with snake oil” claims to make a dollar.

As the economy sputters along and runs down to a halt in certain sectors and in certain places, average persons with average IQs and average modicums of civility are being taxed to the limit of their ethical boundaries.

Caveat Emptor needs an informed populace. It is not in the interest of business to have an informed populace.

The glory days of 1:N communication (the megaphone rented to Global Village idiots,) are over and
now that the internet is here, all of those people on both sides of the buyer/seller barrier are struggling.

One side just needs the old megaphone. The needs of business are for P.R., buzz and a carefully controlled message. In this way, opening up the ownership of websites to commercial enterprises in 1995 (not even ten years ago!) was the most pro-business event that has ever occurred.

The other side’s needs are far more complex. Caveat emptor needs an informed populace and it needs all kinds of information. It needs N:M communications, which the internet can provide at a low enough cost that any individual can have it.

However, that individual and businesses (and government, NGO, military etc.) are not on equal footing as they both compete for P.R. and buzz.

Business has had almost a century of dealing with P.R. firms, who themselves have had almost a century of honing their well paid craft of information prestidigitation to make horse shit into rose food.

Businesses also have a far larger budget.

Basically, between the changes happening in congress (of whom, for whom and for how much?) regarding the supposed right to free speech of businesses, which will shortly fill your senses with the P.R. that businesses can and will pay for and the dismantling of the news reportage organizations silencing whatever voices existed, I fear for free speech. (Free [as in libre] isn’t free [as in inexpensive] anymore.)