• Writing for the Seattle Times, John Harner visits a couple of veteran journalists and turns up all the stereotypes about bloggers. It will be a step forward when journalists stop dismissing bloggers as just a bunch of undisciplined vermin and start working with this democratic medium to make it better.
• MediaPost cites the unusually dire language financial firms use in recent forecasts for the newspaper industry. Moody’s lowered its outlook for the New York Times Co. to a rare “negative” rating. Fitch Ratings noted that at least half the recent declines in revenue are due to “secular” rather than “cyclical” factors. That means that money ain’t coming back. Fitch then piles on by forecasting that newspapers’ online revenue will be under continuous pressure from the large number of alternative venues that advertisers have there.
• Maybe the salvation of print is scratch-n-sniff advertising, which is being tried out by the LA Times, according to Forbes. At least that’s one idea that can’t be duplicated online. Or can it? Back in the dot-com bubble, a startup called DigiScents invented a product that could transmit smells over the Internet. A company called TriScenx is still pushing the concept. It takes all kinds.

The American Journalism Review writes about the newsroom of the future and offers interesting insight into some of the experiments taking place at metro dailies around the U.S. (it’s ironic that this story about next-generation publishing contains not a single hyperlink, by the way).

What’s clear from this story is that several papers are taking the bull by the horns and attempting to reinvent themselves. They’re hacking away at distinctions between print and online staffs, stressing speed over analysis, streamlining editorial hierarchy and trying to think of themselves as multimedia publishers. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution actually went so far as to require half the editorial staff to apply for new positions. This can’t be easy for anyone.

One gets the sense from this article that a lot of ideas are being tried at the few papers that have stopped cursing the darkness and are instead trying to do something about their plight. No doubt a lot of these new avenues will become blind alleys, but at least they’re trying something.

Samuel Johnson has been quoted as saying, “When a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.” It is encouraging to see some major metros concentrating their minds on the future of news. They’re the ones that will be in the best position to survive the shakeout.

In an essay I wrote in early 2007 about the impending collapse of major metropolitan daily newspapers, I tried to sketch out the reasons why the existing business model is unsustainable. Now, a much shorter article on Silicon Alley Insider, does a better job than I did of outlining the economic scenario. If you want to understand why major metros are screwed, look at Henry Blodget’s analysis.

Mark Glaser and Nicholas Carr have been mixing it up over the outlook for the newspaper industry and both have interesting cases to make.

In a piece on MediaShift, Glaser argues that journalism jobs aren’t going away so much as being redirected into online outlets. He cites numerous sources claiming that online reporting and production jobs are plentiful and growing. And he offers examples of newspapers that have cut staff in print while hiring online.

Carr, who’s a bit of a professional skeptic, pokes holes in Glaser’s thesis. He notes that Glaser doesn’t cite many actual numbers in his reporting (which is true) and cites many numbers of his own, including damning Bureau of Labor Statistics figures that show that employment is falling in both print and online media.

Glaser responds that it’s really, really difficult to find accurate numbers about media employment trends. He says the coverage is all focused on the bad news while the bright spots in journalism employment – including a stable-to-growing picture at smaller newspapers – is ignored. And he notes that overall job losses in newspapers are still under 10% in the last decade.

Both authors make valid points. Where I part company with Glaser is over his assertion that newspapers need to do a better job of “re-skilling” their print veterans. In my experience, the ink-stained wretches of print journalism are a notoriously stubborn lot, and few of them are willing to make the changes that are necessary to practice their craft online. Digital journalism requires a completely different approach to reporting and production. It’s unrealistic to think that a newspaper is going to wait for $100,000-a-year veteran reporter to “get it” when they can find eager young journalists who are willing to do the job for a fraction of the cost.

There’s no question that the future of newspapers is online, but the economics of that business demands that they make a wrenching transition from a high-dollar cost structure to a much smaller business. This will involve lots of layoffs, particularly of veterans. Many of these people are well-connected in the media world, and there troubles will continue to generate extensive coverage.

There will be lots of journalism jobs in the digital-media world of the future, but I expect that not many of them will be filled by the people who today are putting ink on dead trees.

The Death Watch covers good news, too (remember, we like newspapers and will miss them when they go away). So it’s nice to read that The Wall Street Journal Claims Record Online Traffic Month for August. Although bad news about the economy was at least part of the reason for the surge in activity, the Journal nevertheless registered remarkable growth across its Web properties. Unique visitors to wsj.com were up 29%, page views up 22% and traffic to Barron’s Online up an incredible 181%. You don’t see growth like this in mature online operations very often. It’s good news for the Journal.

The question that wasn’t answered in the E&P article is how this relates to paid subscriptions. The Journal remains a stubborn holdout against the broad move to free access to newspaper sites. If these strong numbers correlate with growth in paid subscriptions, it’s an endorsement for the model that the NY Times recently ditched.

In commenting on a 9.2% drop in ad revenue in August – including a stunning 25% plunge in the profitable real estate classified business – McClatchy CEO Gary Pruitt said, “We are working hard to mitigate the impact of revenue declines by exerting strong cost discipline…We are making progress on reducing debt in the third quarter and will continue to focus on de-levering our balance sheet.”

I tried to find a definition for “de-lever” but all I could come up with is this entry on Wikipedia. It apparently has something to do with liver, but my Dutch isn’t too good.

In any case, I doubt Pruitt was looking to offal to solve the company’s problems. My guess is that he plans to de-lever some pink slips soon

Thew New York Times Co. said it plans to cut 500 jobs, including 35 positions in The Boston Globe newsroom and 45 on the NY Times editorial staff.

“Knight-Ridder Inc. yesterday said it was eliminating 100 newsroom jobs at the Philadelphia Inquirer and its sister paper, the Philadelphia Daily News, because of lower circulation and revenue. The Boston Herald this year said it was eliminating about one quarter of its newsroom staff,” said an article in the Globe.

A Globe spokesman noted that the paper still has the largest editorial staff in New England, but that’s slim consolation when your biggest competitor has just slashed a quarter of its workforce. The Globe layoffs won’t begin till October, which means the Globe has got to be one gloomy place right now.

Three recent items of note:

MediaPost reports that newspapers have a surprising new competitor in eBay. The auctioneer’s new classified advertising service, which facilitates transactions between people who live near each other, is a potentially powerful force in classified advertising, which is newspapers’ most profitable business. The article goes on to suggest that newspapers should partner with eBay, which is kind of like thanking your host for the glass of poison he’s just offered you.

The VP of Marketing at Eluma makes a case for news organizations to get local again. In an iMediaConnection opinion piece that’s otherwise a shameless pitch for his company’s products, Joe Lichtenberg cites a B&C/Magid Media Labs study of 2,000 Internet users that found that only 13% use the Web for local news. However, 60% said they’d be likely to use a local TV site for topics that include health, real estate, in-depth sports and local events. Yes, it’s all about local. Years ago, a lot of papers got New York Times-envy and decided to expand their international coverage. They’re paying for that now. The few newspapers that survive the coming nuclear winter will be those that refocus aggressively on local issues and leave White House press conferences to the AP.

Editor & Publisher, whose coverage of the meltdown of its core market has been largely uninspiring, does come through with a provocative argument by Steve Outing that newspapers should get over their obsession with objectivity. Harking back to the finest days of muckraking, Outing argues that the media’s efforts to tell both sides of the global warming issue is as dumb as telling both sides of the polygamy issue. The fact that some whackos still believe global warming is just a cyclical atmospheric change is no reason to give them equal time. Newspapers should advocate for their readers to get active and do something, Outing says. It’s interesting advice. In the new world in which everyone is an opinion writer, not having an opinion may make newspapers look clueless.

N. Christian Anderson III leaves after 27 years as the paper is consolidated its into parent’s community newspaper division. According to the Mercury-News:

“Two weeks ago, the Register announced layoffs and expense cuts after a 14 percent drop in revenue and a 38 percent decline in profit from the year before. Anderson, 57, joined the newspaper in 1980 as editor and led it to its first Pulitzers in 1985 and 1989.”

Quite a loss.

From MediaPost: “Some of the nation’s largest newspaper publishers reported their July revenue on Monday, and the news isn’t good. The third quarter is shaping up to be as bad as the second…[at McClatchy,] classifieds, …dropped 15.3%, and national revenue…tumbled 19%. Real-estate classifieds suffered the biggest percentage drop, plunging 26%.

“[Gannett said] newspaper revenue slid 6.1% to $408.2 million, due mostly to the 8.3% decline in classifieds and the 9.1% drop in national ad revenue. In terms of its individual properties, the most alarming results came from USA Today, where total ad revenue slid 15.9%.

“[Lee Enterprises said that among ad revenue declines,] automotive was down 17.4%, employment 13.6%, and real estate 13.2%.”