Here’s the redesigned home page of the Orlando Sentinel. This will apparently serve as a model for redesigns of several other Tribune Co. properties. What do you think? Ping us in the comments area below.

Tribune Co.’s Chief Innovation Officer Lee Abrams has already weighed in and HE LOVES IT! The Wall Street Journal explains the background of the ambitious company-wide effort and says the South Florida Sun-Sentinel and the Baltimore Sun are next on the redesign list, followed by the Chicago Tribune. Whether a visual makeover can repair the problems all these papers are suffering in their core markets is a matter of speculation, but there’s no doubt Zell & Co. are trying some new tactics.

A Modest Proposal for Miami

Could Miami become a one-newspaper town? Alan Mutter thinks so, and he puts forth a persuasive argument for restructuring the Herald and the Sun-Sentinel under a joint operating agreement (JOA). JOAs were a 1970s gift from the government to the newspaper industry that enabled competing newspapers to consolidate operations and do business as a legal duopoly. For the last 30 years, it’s been a license to print money. Today, it may be a lifeline to publishers whose only alternative is closure. Unfortunately, JOAs have also historically been a license for publishers to become fat and complacent as competition is removed from the landscape. They’re one of the reasons the industry is in so much trouble today.

Editors Debate Newspaper Survival

A group of Chicago journalists got together last week to discuss the topic of “Will Newspapers Survive?” The panelists were all working reporters and editors who are realistic about the future and their attitudes were strikingly sanguine, as reported by Chicago Reader. Tom McNamee, editorial page editor of the Chicago Sun-Times, offered the most dispassionate perspective: “We may not all be making fortunes. Our 30 percent profit days are over. We may not survive. But you know what — that’s our problem. Not to say that the world’s in crisis because newspapers may not survive in the form that we recognize now.” Other panelists blamed the business side for not innovating quickly enough. The editors are psyched to change, they said, but the sales and management suits are too stuck on their historic profit margins. (via Editors Weblog )

Miscellany

• Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard Downier, who led the newsroom to 25 Pulitzer Prizes, will step down after 17 years in the position and 44 years with the newspaper. Downie, 66, said new blood is needed to accommodate rapid changes in the business. “So much further change now needs to take place at the newspaper and Web site, and someone else should be tackling that,” he said. He is a true class act.
• The Georgetown (Kentucky) News-Graphic will switch from afternoon to morning delivery, saying that the cost benefits are compelling in this day of stratospheric gas prices. Publisher Mike Scogin notes “In the outer parts of the county…carriers sometimes travel several miles to deliver just a couple of newspapers.” (via Fade to Black )
• As the Daytona Beach News-Journal waits to be sold, its publisher talks straight to the staff. Gone are 99 positions and a whole slew of tasks are being transferred to other departments or outsourced entirely. Bureaus will close, stock tables will be cut and business sections will be consolidated. It all adds up to one big morale hemorrhage, but the News-Journal publisher’s message is realistic: “Despite the unavoidable disruptions and distractions this week, we still have jobs to do, and it is in everybody’s best interest that we do them professionally and well.”
• If your newspaper is considering a 10% staff cut, be glad you aren’t in Taiwan. The China Times will lay off almost half its staff due to the weak economy.
• It seems like you could spend all day just reading gossip and analysis blog (like this one) about the newspaper industry. Danny Sanchez has gone and assembled a pretty fine directory of them.

And Finally…

The editors of the Washington Post have recently been quoted as saying that the paper could do with fewer copy editors. The Post‘s Gene Weingarten has some fun with that idea. Thanks for reminding us that the wizards of grammar and spelling do play a vital role. (via Mark Hamilton)

Could Rupert Murdoch save the US newspaper industry? He may have his chance sooner than anyone imagined because things are worse than anyone predicted

The New York Times sums up the industry’s recent gruesome financial news and speculates that continued losses are “raising serious questions about the survival of some papers and the solvency of their parent companies.” Richard Perez-Pena’s piece says that 14% revenue declines in May against already weak 2007 numbers were worse than anyone expected and no one knows where the bottom is. While analysts agree that the bleeding has to stop sometime, they have no idea how bad things will get before that time arrives. With debt defaults looming, the most likely scenario is that weak players will consolidate with stronger ones.

If consolidation is the trend, then who will be the consolidators? Looking at the current sorry lineup of candidates, News Corp. looks like the only logical winner. If Rupert Murdoch plays his cards right, he could end up sitting on top of a much bigger empire than anyone envisioned when he made his daring bid for The Wall Street Journal less than a year ago.

Murdoch and his COO, Peter Chernin, were at the Cannes International Advertising Festival last week and were asked about the industry downturn. “We are going to plough right ahead and hopefully increase our share of the market wherever we can,” Murdoch said. Chernin added that it was “time to take market share if weaker competitors go away.”

That time may be soon. There is widespread anticipation that either Tribune Co., McClatchy and/or Philadelphia Media Holdings will default on loan covenants this year, which would immediately put them in play. Journal Register and Sun-Times Media Group are on life support. These companies collectively represent scores of US newspapers that could conceivably be bought for pennies on the dollar within the next year.

And who better to buy them that News Corp.? The company has a diversified media business with strength in its Fox television holdings and MySpace social network. Murdoch is confounding his critics by messing with the inviolate Wall Street Journal editorial model and actually gaining market share against The New York Times, which must be freaking out right now. Sure, Murodch walked away from the bidding for Newsday, but perhaps he’s simply waiting for a much bigger opportunity: the chance to own a publishing empire that includes Chicago, Los Angeles and much of the southeastern US. With Tribune and McClatchy, he’d have that. For a few dollars more, he could add Journal Register’s extensive midwesern holdings and the Philadelphia Inquirer.

With that kind of throw weight, Murdoch could do some interesting things to leverage economies of scale. And those properties could do a lot worse than to have Rupert as the boss. When you consider the alternative scenarios of bankers or professional investors taking over businesses they know nothing about, then the prospect of ownership by a savvy and successful media tycoon looks pretty palatable. As controversial as Murdoch’s tactics sometimes are, the man has a remarkable track record and a vision for the future of media. He is also one of the few publishers in the world who is investing in newspapers right now. Over the next 12 months, Murdoch could have an unprecedented opportunity to turn his vision into action on a much larger scale.

What do you think? Please weigh in with your comments.

Continuing fallout from McClatchy’s 1,400-person layoff last week: PaidContent.org’s Joseph Weisenthal remarks on all the attention to CEO Gary Pruitt’s pay, noting that you have to offer a competitive salary to get a good executive these days. He’s right. Tempers also flared at the Raleigh News & Observer over an executive’s decision to stay at a $210-per-night hotel on a recent visit to the paper just before the layoffs. The Raleigh Chronicle has the dirt, including links to executive blog postings on the topic. The Chronicle also claims that, in blaming the Internet for the company’s fortunates, McClatchy execs failed to note the impact of a strong alternative publishing market on the N&O‘s business. Editor & Publisher‘s Mark Fitzgerald analyzes McClatchy’s $4 billion debt, which seemed worth taking on at the time but which, in retrospect, was horribly timed. Still, McClatchy may be better positioned than most publishers to survive the industry’s collapse, he concludes. Analysts say it’s one of the better managed companies in the business.

Meanwhile, McClatchy editors and columnists weighed in on what comes next. Dave Zeeck at the Tacoma News quotes Mark Twain reasoning that there’ll always be jobs for reporters. Sacramento Bee Editor Melanie Sill is defiant. She points out all the good work the paper is still doing and says the loss of seven editors will just force everyone to be a little more innovative. Meanwhile, Miami Herald ombudsman Edward Schumacher-Matos takes the novel approach of asking readers to tell him what choices they think the paper should make. And Bob Ray Sanders of the Fort Worth Star Telegram compares the whole thing to a funeral in a dour, backward-looking essay.

And in Non-McClatchy News…

Add Hearst Corp. to the list of publishers struggling with the shifting winds of the industry. The publisher of 15 dailies and more than 200 magazines lost its CEO of 15 years last week over an apparent policy dispute with the board. Hearst has managed to make some smart bets online over the last decade, buying it a degree of insulation from the industry’s troubles, but with its San Francisco Chronicle serving as the poster child for newspaper collapse, it perhaps can’t change strategy quickly enough. Poynter’s Rick Edmonds speculates about what’s been going on in the Hearst board room and remarks upon Hearst’s unusual management trust, which expires upon the death of the last family member who was living at the time of William Randolph’s death in 1951.

By the way, where’s Belo Corp. in all the recent layoff activity? Jeff Siegel notes that last week’s bloodbath at the Fort Worth Star-Telegram should be putting pressure on the Dallas Morning News to cut back, but owner Belo has been strangely silent. So the stock market is speaking, knocking Belo shares about 6% lower last week. If the Star-Telegram can cut a sixth of its editorial staff with impunity, can the Morning News afford not to notice?

Forecasts of the impending death of the Sun-Times Media Group are greatly exaggerated, at least according to company executives. The struggling company, which has been saddled by the misdeeds of former executives, has $120 million in the bank and is ready for the worst, top managers told shareholders last week. In fact, CEO Cyrus Freidheim actually believes newspapers will rebound when the economy does in a year or two. His optimism is striking in light of the company’s recent announcement that it is “exploring strategic alternatives,” which is a euphemism for finding a buyer.

Tribune Exec’s Memos Invite Staff Derision

When chief scientists from Google speak, the technology media hang on their every word. Contrast that to Tribune Co., whose executives increasingly look like the village idiots of the newspaper world. The company’s chief innovation officer, Lee Abrams, is fond of sending memos about how the industry can reinvent itself. They’re a rambling brain dump from someone whose lack of insight is almost painful to read. Now parodies are springing up, and P.J. Gladnick excerpts a few from the Poynter discussion forums. Read one of Abrams’ original works on LA Observed before looking at the knock-offs. This is some great satirical writing which is unfortunately being shared amongst only a few insiders. Steve Outing comments that Abrams probably disenfranchised his audience at the outset by admitting that he had “NO idea that reporters were around the globe reporting the news.” Outing titles his blog post bluntly: “Are we watching a Tribune train wreck in progress?”

Layoff Log

• The Eugene Register-Guard will cut its work force by 30 employees, or 12 percent of its 260-person full-time workforce. The paper will try to achieve the reductions through a combination of buyouts and unfilled vacancies, although the publisher wouldn’t rule out layoffs.
• The Cleveland Plain Dealer isn’t laying off – yet. Although two news outlets have reported that dozens of jobs have been cut, Publisher Terrance Egger issued a denial, saying the reports are “100% not accurate.” However, the debate may be a matter of semantics. “Given the current economic conditions and trends, we cannot maintain the current expense base and stay viable,” Egger told Editor & Publisher. A local alternative reporter wrote on his blog last week that executives have told staff that they plan “to cut 35 pages a week from its news pages and 20 percent of its workforce.” The paper employs 304 newsroom staffers.

Miscellany

Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts shows why the people who run newspapers now are not the ones who will reinvent the industry. In a column that is striking in its lack of insight into the troubles facing his own industry, Pitts announces that he’s changed his thinking and now believes that maybe online should come first, that newspaper websites should be the principal online destination for local residents and that people should pay for that service. This was conventional industry wisdom circa 2001. Then Pitts notes that he’s come to this view reluctantly and mainly because he’s afraid of losing his job. Unfortunately, folks like Leonard will lose their jobs anyway because they’re being dragged kicking and screaming into the future. Cynical attempts at defining a solution only make them look more clueless. And solutions like those he proposes are what got the industry in trouble in the first place.

As the Tribune Co. empire unravels, CEO Sam Zell is growing increasingly desperate. Now he’s inciting an openly hostile relationship with his editors. In a call with media and analysts on Thursday, Chief Operating Officer Randy Michaels outlined plans to cut the trim sizes of many of the papers in Tribune’s portfolio in order to save on paper costs. But what will make him public enemy #1 with the company’s journalists were his incendiary statements about reporter productivity.

Noting that Los Angeles Times reporters turn out about one-sixth as many column inches as their counterparts in Hartford or Baltimore, Michaels issued a warning to writers and editors. “When you get into the individuals, you find out that you can eliminate a fair number of people while eliminating not very much content,” he said. “[W]e believe that we can save a lot of money and not lose a lot of productivity.”

Michaels did acknowledge that some kinds of reporting take more time than others, but his warning will earn him no fans among the ink-stained wretches of the newsroom. Reporters hate having their output measured like stacks of cordwood and the practice of counting inches, which is popular with accountants, is universally despised by journalists. The easiest way to jack up productivity, of course, is to rewrite press releases and cut back on editing, which creates a sloppy product that people don’t want to read.

It appears that quality isn’t much on the minds of Sam Zell’s management team these days, however. Michaels also outlined plans to tighten ad-edit ratios, eliminating about 82 pages a week from the LA Times alone. “A paper looks good at 50% advertising,” he said. “[Y]ou can take 500 editorial pages a week out of newspaper and have a 50/50 ad-to-content ratio.”

You can assume that Times staffers are already running the numbers to figure out how many positions will be cut to meet the news ad-edit guidelines. Using Michaels’ estimate of 51 pages per year per journalist and assuming a cut of 4,100 pages per year under the new guidelines, you get a total headcount reduction of 80. And that’s not including the fact that Michaels thinks journalists should produce a lot more copy than they currently are producing. If the Times were to double journalist output, then the paper could theoretically be run with half the editorial staff, and that’s before any page count reductions are taken into account.

Looking at Tribune Co. as a whole, one can calculate some assumptions about coming staff cuts. Michaels said the company “could take about 500 pages out of our newspapers every week.” That figures out to 26,000 pages per year. Assuming the productivity figures outlined above, that nets to a cut of about 100 reporters. Michaels also said that editorial costs make up only one-sixth of the total operating costs of a newspaper. So if you assume, conservatively, that three non-editors can be cut for each editor, the company is probably thinking of a reduction of at least 400 positions. And since everyone needs to be more productive, you can probably safely double that. Please note any errors in my thinking.

Romenesko posts a memo by Hartford Courant Executive Editor Clifford Teutsch that attempts to ease reporter anxiety. Teutsch says all the right things in paying homage to the value of quality reporting, but also notes that “We are going to have to make significant newshole and staff reductions. We want you to know what we face.” Zell and Michaels said that staffing decisions would be left with the management of individual papers but that Tribune would give those executives a lot of data about average productivity across the company’s portfolio to use in making those decisions. Assume that it will be hard for managers to justify maintaining staffing levels that are outside the average range.

Zell commented Thursday that “We underwrote the [buyout] expecting a continued suppression of print revenue, but nobody, including us, expected the kind of dramatic change that occurred in the first quarter.” I’m not so sure that everyone was as bewildered as Sam. Back in April, 2007, I noted in a post on my social media blog that in Zell’s first published interview with Tribune staffers, he had barely mentioned the Internet as a challenge to the paper’s business. This struck me as very strange for a man who was about to take on the challenge of running a vast media empire. Could it be that the Tribune Co.’s predicament was unpredictable only to Sam Zell?

Update: Alan Mutter understands the economics of the newspaper business as well as anyone. I this post, he underscores the seeming randomness of Zell’s tactics. Sam Zell has the permission of investors, managers and even line-level employees to reinvent Tribune Co. and even journalism to some extent, but his recent tactics smack of panic.

Quoting Mutter: “The problem is that no business can remain successful over the long term if the only way it addresses declining sales is by cutting costs. You not only begin to degrade the product but eventually run out of things to cut. Businesses must grow sales and profits to build value. If they go the other way for a sustained period, they will falter and potentially fail.”

Nick Denton says the New York Times should abandon the news-opinion divide and let its reporters and editors insert commentary into their stories. They already do it by quoting sources sympathetic to their point of view, so why not stop pretending and inject a little color into a paper whose impartiality has become a liability? The arrival of blogs at the Times has effectively undermined any pretense of objectivity already and management’s efforts to clarify the wall between opinion and news look increasingly flimsy.

Denton is echoing points that Eric Alterman made a bit less pugnaciously in his New Yorker piece of two months ago. Newspapers started as vehicles for publishers to express their opinions. The concept of an impartial press is a recent phenomenon. Readers are smart enough to make up their own minds about what to believe. What’s wrong with opinion?

Jeff Jarvis agrees with Denton, noting that Times blogs have given him the opportunity to get the perspective of reporters whose work he’s read for years. These people know a lot about the subjects they cover. Why bottle up that perspective behind an artificial veil of neutrality.

Business Blues

Rupert Murdoch took an early victory lap, declaring that he’ll be the chosen owner of Newsday by next week, despite the existence of a richer bid from Cablevision and the likelihood that Mortimer Zuckerman will raise his offer. Murdoch pledged to continue Newsday’s commitment to strong local coverage and underlined his confidence by announcing a surprise doubling of the price of the New York Post to 50 cents. The E&P account also refers to Murdoch’s plans to build a single printing facility to publish Newsday, the Post and The Wall Street Journal. Zuckerman’s Daily News will have its hands full competing with those economies of scale.

With the newspaper industry suffering from the flu, Sun Times Media Group (STMG) has lapsed into pneumonia. The publisher reported a $35.8 million loss in the first quarter, compared to a loss of $4.8 million a year ago. Advertising revenue fell 12.6%, which is considerably more than declines at most papers. We wrote earlier about speculation that the Chicago Sun-Times may be the next big metro daily to fold, in part because of factors that transcend the industry’s crisis. STMG said it’s on track to cut expenses by $50 million by June 30 and is exploring strategic alternatives.

Tribune Co. posted an 8% drop in revenue, but the results were helped by growth in the broadcast sector. Newspaper revenue was off 11%. More worrisome is that cash flow shrank to $200 million from $239 million a year ago. That’s not good for a company that has a big debt payment looming at the end of the year.

And Finally…

• The Newark Star Ledger and hyperlocal website Baristanet.com are teaming up to launch a print product, a guide to Montclair, N.J. The magazine goes out to 70,000 readers next week. This is one example of how print/online partnerships can be win-win propositions.
• The San Diego Union-Tribune fired three top people who directed the company’s online products, but apparently didn’t do it very well. San Diego Weekly Reader says the trio positioned the online unit internally as competitive with the print news team, which didn’t do wonders for morale. There was also a disastrous radio venture.
• When all else fails, pray. That’s the mission of PrayingForPapers.com, a site that “is just asking that anyone who cares about their fellow journalists devote part of their prayer time to ‘Pray for Papers.'” The site’s tag line is an excerpt from Exodus that betrays the enormity of the industry’s task. (Via E&P)

Reports Say Newsday Goes to Murdoch; Rivals Disagree

Tuesday must have been a busy day for media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, who concluded a handshake deal with Tribune Co. to buy Newsday while also removing the top editor of another area property: The Wall Street Journal. Newsday said its price would be $580 million, which would just about cover Tribune’s impending debt obligation. Murdoch has already contacted the county executives of two Long Island counties to confirm that he’d be spending more time there. He told one of them that he hopes to conclude the deal in two weeks.

News of the Newsday sale was first reported on Monday, and dribs and drabs of information filtered in yesterday. Editor & Publisher says the deal isn’t done yet. Rivals thought they had until next week to submit a bid and plan to do just that. E&P also notes that Murdoch’s ownership of three newspapers (he also has the Daily News) and two TV stations in New York could raise regulatory concerns. It sounds like the fat lady has yet to sing on this deal.

More Tumult at the WSJ

Meanwhile, the managing editor of The Wall Street Journal resigned after less than a year on the job. The announcement made it clear that this was a Murdoch bag job. Marcus Brauchli had appeared in public less than two weeks earlier acting like a good company man, and the official statement said only that he was leaving to become a consultant. In his letter to the staff, which the Journal published, Brauchli said, “Now that the ownership transition has taken place, I have come to believe the new owners should have a managing editor of their choosing.” That can’t have lifted the already low morale on the staff.

E&P was all over this story, too, noting that Brauchli was respected as a guardian of editorial independence and wondering what role the newspaper’s editorial independence committee would have in choosing a successor. Given the success Murdoch has had in effecting momentous change at the Journal in such a short time, it’s likely that the owner will get his way.

Times Management Caves

The prospect of being cornered by Murdoch must have the Sulzbergers nervous. Under pressure by two large investors, the Times ownership added representatives of those funds to its board and expanded the total board size to an unwieldy 15 members. Chairman Arthur Sulzberger also dismissed talk of a possible sale of the company, which is what chairmen usually say just before they sell the company. Michael Bloomberg is rumored to be interested.

Sulzberger also outlined a four-part turnaround strategy for Times Co. including cost cuts of $230 million this year, the sale of some divisions and expansion of its online advertising programs with Google and Yahoo.

Latest Earnings Reports Dribble In

News that Journal Communications’ first-quarter profit dropped 91% would usually have some brokers on the ledge, but in this case the previous year’s numbers were boosted by an extraordinary gain. The actual revenue decline was about 9%, on par with recent results posted by other publishers. The industry-wide trend is clear. Year-over-year declines are running at about 10%. In an otherwise upbeat note to staff, McClatchy CEO Gary Pruitt confirmed that the double-digit percentage declines are a fact of life adds, “At this point we simply can’t tell when this decline will end.”

Short takes

• The Chicago Sun-Times is on track to turn a profit by the end of the year, according to a memo prepared for potential buyers of parent firm Sun-Times Media Group. The company has been victimized by industry trends and past wrongdoings by two former executives. BusinessWeek recently speculated that it may not last a year.
• The Fort Worth Star-Telegram laid off 15 employees, including eight in the newsroom. The layoffs were apparently a surprise.
• Five full-time employees and four part-timers will be laid off at Maine’s Kennebec Journal and Morning Sentinel. Both papers are up for sale by its Seattle-based owner.

We wish we could end the week on a happy note, but as we noted on Monday, it’s earnings season. Unfortunately, the news couldn’t be much worse. If troubles at the New York Times and Media General are any indication, the rest of the year could be ugly.

New York Times Co. Troubles Deepen

The New York Times Co. swung to a small loss in the first quarter from a $24 million profit a year ago. In a conference call, the CEO didn’t indicate that things were going to get better any time soon. The more worrisome trend may be that online growth is now slowing.

As a result, it looks like the Times newspaper will have to resort to some layoffs to achieve its goal of a 100-position reduction in workforce. Not enough people have taken the buyout offer. The deadline is next Tuesday and the layoffs, if they happen, will be the first in the paper’s 167-year history.
The media’s focus on the 100 job cuts at the Old Gray Lady may obscure the bigger view of the NYT Co. crisis. Media Post points out that the company has cut over 2,000 jobs – about 18% of the total staff – since 2003. The reason for the low response to the recent buyout offer is that the job market is so bleak for ex-journalists, the article suggests.

It offers this cheery quote from analyst Ken Doctor: “Clearly, the decline in revenues is deepening. At this point, there really is no bottom.” As layoffs continue, in future he predicts “a lot of newspapers hiring part-timers, stringers and bloggers–but no more full-time, $50,000-a-year jobs.”

Media General Hammered by Florida Exposure

The news was even worse at Media General, which is heavily dependent to the recession-laden Florida market. The quarterly loss of $20.3 million is more than three times last year’s loss. But check out the declines in these ad categories:

• Newspaper ad revenue off 19.1%
• Interactive media revenue down 3.3% (this is the future, remember)
• Classified ad revenue off 28%
• National ad revenue down 21%

It’s not surprising that Media General just offered buyouts to half the employees in its Florida Communications Group. The terms are generous, ranging up to 39 weeks of pay. Media General didn’t say how many jobs it hopes to eliminate with the offer, but it did say that layoffs are possible.

And the Bad News Spreads

More talk of layoffs, closings and cost reductions. Here’s the rundown:

• The Los Angeles Times Pressmens 20-Year Club has the scoop on Advance Publications’ plan to shut down one of its two production facilities. Advance Publications publishes the Newark Star-Ledger. The two plants employ more than 600 people, though it’s not clear how many jobs would be cut. A decision is expected within the next few weeks.
• Times are hard, indeed, in the New York-Philadelphia corridor. The AP reports that the owner of Philadelphia’s two largest daily newspapers told a judge last week that unraveling its pension mess could lead to more layoffs. One of the two pensions the company merged is underfunded and the costs of bringing it up to snuff were unanticipated. In January, Philadelphia Media Holdings LLC said it had to cut costs by 10% or its viability would be in doubt.
• The Toronto Star will cut 160 jobs, or a little less than 3% of its total workforce. The Canadian Journalism Project points out that this is disconcerting in light of the recent reports that the Canadian newspaper industry is faring much better than its U.S. counterpart.
• The Raleigh News & Observer just told its staff that layoffs may be needed to cope with the business downturn. The paper employs 206 editorial staff.
• The suburban Chicago Daily Herald laid off an unspecified number of employees throughout the company. Classified ad revenues are off as much as 45% year-over-year.
• And finally, further evidence that Sam Zell’s Tribune Co. empire may be unraveling. Revenues continue to fall faster than expected, and now Zell is talking about selling off “newspapers and other properties.” Could that mean that titles other than Newsday may go on the block? One recent report said the LA Times may be in play.

But wait, there’s even more: The source of many of the industry’s problems is doing just fine. Blogger Roy Greenslade notes that Craigslist.org has quietly expanded its global footprint by 120 cities, bringing the total to 570. Craigslist may be the single biggest financial competitor the newspaper industry has. Here is the devastatingly brief, haiku-like announcement from Craig Newmark.

Finally, Philip Stone comments on the empty halls at the once-great Nexpo newspaper equipment trade show. It used to be that Nexpo was so big that only a few convention centers in the country could accommodate it, he says. But at this year’s event, you could have rolled a bowling ball down the expo floor and not disturbed anyone.

Go bowling this weekend. We can use a break.

The New Yorker devotes 6,600 meticulously edited words to the impending death of newspapers, examining objectively the promise and perils of a new-media world which writer Eric Alterman sees embodied in the Huffington Post. Drawing on sources ranging from Walter Lippman to The Simpsons, Alterman concludes:

• That the death of newspapers is inevitable;
• That the model that will emerge to replace them looks strikingly like that of the newspapers of 200 years ago; and
• That our democracy is probably better off for this trend, although the plight of people in “the dark” is worse.

Here are some excerpts. Everything is elliptical:

Bill Keller, the executive editor of the Times, said recently in a speech in London, “At places where editors and publishers gather, the mood these days is funereal. Editors ask one another, ‘How are you?,’ in that sober tone one employs with friends who have just emerged from rehab or a messy divorce.”

The McClatchy Company, which was the only company to bid on the Knight Ridder chain when, in 2005, it was put on the auction block, has surrendered more than eighty per cent of its stock value since making the $6.5-billion purchase. Lee Enterprises’ stock is down by three-quarters since it bought out the Pulitzer chain, the same year. America’s most prized journalistic possessions are suddenly looking like corporate millstones. Since 1990, a quarter of all American newspaper jobs have disappeared.

Only nineteen per cent of Americans between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four claim even to look at a daily newspaper. The average age of the American newspaper reader is fifty-five and rising.

It is a point of ironic injustice, perhaps, that when a reader surfs the Web in search of political news he frequently ends up at a site that is merely aggregating journalistic work that originated in a newspaper, but that fact is not likely to save any newspaper jobs or increase papers’ stock valuation.

A recent study published by Sacred Heart University found that fewer than twenty per cent of Americans said they could believe “all or most” media reporting, a figure that has fallen from more than twenty-seven per cent just five years ago, Nearly nine in ten Americans, according to the Sacred Heart study, say that the media consciously seek to influence public policies, though they disagree about whether the bias is liberal or conservative.

Arianna Huffington and her partners believe that their model points to where the news business is heading. “People love to talk about the death of newspapers, as if it’s a foregone conclusion. I think that’s ridiculous,” she says. “Traditional media just need to realize that the online world isn’t the enemy. In fact, it’s the thing that will save them, if they fully embrace it.”

[Huffington Post] is poised to break even on advertising revenue of somewhere between six and ten million dollars annually, according to estimates from Nielsen NetRatings and comScore, the Huffington Post is more popular than all but eight newspaper sites.

The blogosphere relies on its readership, €”its community, €”for quality control.

Most posts inside the [Huffington] site, however, go up before an editor sees them.

Journalism works well, [Walter] Lippmann wrote, when “it can report the score of a game or a transatlantic flight, or the death of a monarch.” But where the situation is more complicated, journalism “causes no end of derangement, misunderstanding, and even misrepresentation.”

When Lippmann was writing, many newspapers remained committed to the partisan model of the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century American press, in which editors and publishers viewed themselves as appendages of one or another political power or patronage machine and slanted their news offerings accordingly.

The twentieth-century model, in which newspapers strive for political independence and attempt to act as referees between competing parties on behalf of what they perceive to be the public interest, was, in Lippmann’s time, in its infancy.

[The piece goes into an analysis of a 1920s debate between Lippman and rival John Dewey over the nature and methods of democratic discourse.]

As the profession grew more sophisticated and respected, top reporters, anchors, and editors naturally rose in status to the point where some came to be considered the social equals of the senators, [P]olitics increasingly became a business for professionals and a spectator sport for the great unwashed

The Huffington Post was hardly the first Web site to stumble on the technique of leveraging the knowledge of its readers to challenge the mainstream media narrative. For example, conservative bloggers at sites like Little Green Footballs took pleasure in helping to bring down Dan Rather after he broadcast dubious documents allegedly showing that George W. Bush had received special treatment during his service in the Texas Air National Guard.

Talking Points Memo “was almost single-handedly responsible for bringing the story of the fired U.S. Attorneys to a boil,” a scandal that ultimately ended with the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and a George Polk Award for Marshall, the first ever for a blogger.

During the Katrina crisis, for example, [Talking Points Memo] discovered that some of [its] readers worked in the federal government’s climate-and-weather-tracking infrastructure. They provided the site with reliable reporting available nowhere else.

Traditional newspaper men and women tend to be unimpressed by the style of journalism practiced at the political Web sites, Real reporting, especially the investigative kind, is expensive, they remind us. Aggregation and opinion are cheap.

In October, 2005, at an advertisers’ conference in Phoenix, Bill Keller complained that bloggers merely “recycle and chew on the news,” contrasting that with the Times‘ emphasis on what he called “a ‘journalism of verification,’ ” rather than mere “assertion.”

“Bloggers are not chewing on the news. They are spitting it out,” Arianna Huffington protested, “In the run-up to the Iraq war, many in the mainstream media, including the New York Times, lost their veneer of unassailable trustworthiness for many readers and viewers.”

Newspaper editors now say that they “get it.” Yet traditional journalists are blinkered by their emotional investment in their Lippmann-like status as insiders. They tend to dismiss not only most blogosphere-based criticisms but also the messy democratic ferment from which these criticisms emanate. The Chicago Tribune recently felt compelled to shut down comment boards [because they] “were beginning to read like a community of foul-mouthed bigots.”

[Huffington] predicts “more vigorous reporting in the future that will include distributed journalism, €”wisdom-of-the-crowd reporting, A lot of reporting now is just piling on the conventional wisdom, €”with important stories dying on the front page of the New York Times.”

And so we are about to enter a fractured, chaotic world of news, characterized by superior community conversation but a decidedly diminished level of first-rate journalism.

Before Adolph Ochs took over the Times, in 1896, and issued his famous “without fear or favor” declaration, the American scene was dominated by brazenly partisan newspapers. And the news cultures of many European nations long ago embraced the notion of competing narratives for different political communities, It may not be entirely coincidental that these nations enjoy a level of political engagement that dwarfs that of the United States.

In “Imagined Communities” (1983), an influential book on the origins of nationalism, the political scientist Benedict Anderson recalls Hegel’s comparison of the ritual of the morning paper to that of morning prayer: “Each communicant is well aware that the ceremony he performs is being replicated simultaneously by thousands (or millions) of others of whose existence he is confident, yet of whose identity he has not the slightest notion.” It is at least partially through the “imagined community” of the daily newspaper, Anderson writes, that nations are forged.

Your obedient editor has been traveling for much of the last week, but the death watch doesn’t stop. Catching up on a few ongoing stories:

Zell Hell

Prescriptions for the Times

What do to about The New York Times? Big investors are ready to force change, the holding company strategy is tanking and Marc Andreesseen has launched a death watch.

Jeff Jarvis relates an intriguing reader comment suggesting survival strategies for the New York Times and the Boston Globe in “reverse syndication.” Basically, the Times sets itself up as the national newspaper of record and ditches the New York market. It syndicates its content to a network of locally-focused newspapers, which have sold off their expensive production and distribution assets and which are now essentially contract publishing operations working through a variety of media.

The former local newspaper publishers would now produce a portfolio of hyper-local publications in print and online and syndicate much of the content from other sources, including The New York Times. By selling off the expensive presses and delivery trucks (which wouldn’t be easy, BTW), they become more nimble and focused. The Times continues to deliver high-quality reporting at a high level. It’s a novel idea, though I’m not sure how the interest of quality journalism would be served. It seems that the Times would aggregate all the best reporting and the local companies would distribute variations of the Metro in their markets.

Meanwhile, Ken Doctor suggests that the Times should exit the local newspaper business.

Inquirer Publisher Seeks More Cost Cuts – AP, Jan. 23, 2008

Quoting: “The owners of Philadelphia’s two largest newspapers said they need tocut costs by an additional 10 percent or the company will face dire consequences…Philadelphia Media Holdings LLC would have trouble meeting debt payments if it doesn’t make changes…[A columnist says:] ‘We’ve gone through a series of economic cuts in the past years, and it is hard to see where they can cut further.’…One year ago, the company gave layoff notices to about 70 Inquirernewsroom employees, or 17 percent of the editorial staff, and laid off 34 people in advertising, or nearly 10 percent of the sales force.”

Inquirer Staffers React to Tierney’s “10 Percent” Threat – The Daily Examiner, Jan. 23, 2008
[The Philadelphia magazine website account adds some facts and color:

• The Guild is speculating that the threat of cuts is a bargaining tactic against the union;
• A Guild memo says executives “did not say what would happen if savings targets are not met, but made references to outsourcing jobs overseas.”
• One features writer asks “Who needs a Neighbors section when we could have the New Delhi Digest every day?”
• Quoting: “When Eagles head coach Andy Reid was suddenly scheduled to appear at an impromptu news conference, an editor went running through the newsroom looking for somebody, anybody, to cover it. ‘There are situations like that every day,’ says a staffer. -Ed.]

Metro – Sources: Globe will cut back staff, raise price – Metro, Jan. 24, 2008
[A strange media war is playing out in Boston, where the Globe and an alternative daily paper in which it owns a significant interest are competing with each other to scoop each other’s bad news. The Globe recently scooped the Metro in reporting the paper’s mounting losses. – Ed.]

Quoting: “The Boston Globe will soon announcecutbacks at the newspaper, including hundreds of layoffs, and anincrease in the per copy price of the paper to 75 cents as of Feb. 1,according to several sources inside and outside of the paper….The Globe saw a nearly 7 percent decrease — from 386,417 to 360,695 —in its daily circulation between Sept. 2006 and Sept. 2007.”

Globe says no big layoff coming — its Metro free paper got it wrong – Boston Business Journal, Jan. 24, 2008

[A Boston Globe spokesman says a report of impending layoffs of “hundreds” of Globe staffers published by Metro, a free paper in which the Globe owns a 49% stake, are false. However, his wording leaves plenty of wiggle room. The spokesman said the story is “factually incorrect” (how is this different from “incorrect?”) and that “There are no plans for a staff reduction of the size cited in the Metro.” His wording leaves leeway for the Globe to lay off up to 199 people and still call the Metro story incorrect. -Ed.]

The Sun May Be Getting Smaller, but We Won’t Give Ground On Local News – Kitsap Sun, Jan. 12, 2008

[The editor of the Kitsap Sun, which has been ravaged by staff cuts, declares his intention to continue the paper’s local news coverage. -Ed.]

After Job Cuts in 2007 — What’s Ahead? – Editor & Publisher, Jan. 15, 2008

[An E&P editor recaps the grim ledger from 2007, when US newspaper industry employment declined almost 3%. -Ed.]

Meanwhile, layoffs at the Chicago Sun-Times announced nearly a month ago continue to generate lots of coverage:

Sun-Times staffers get pink slips…by phone — chicagotribune.com, Jan. 23, 2008
[Management apparently just can’t wait to get laid-off staffers out the door. -Ed.]

Sun-Times wrestles with new reality – LATimes Pressmen Forums