Hei Amin. Regarding US newspapers...
I worked for a newspaper in the US before coming to Jyväskylä for my
master's degree. Alas, newspaper readership in the States has been sliding
for many years. When I was ten (1965) there were basically only three
network television channels and no internet. Also, it seemed that life was
slower. Moms stayed home (mostly) and dads were home for dinner by 5:00 pm.
Things are different now. There are lots of options for news/entertainment
now: hundreds of TV channels, internet, radio, television, magazines. Two
income families are mandatory. Commutes to and from work are lengthier. More
women in the workforce has changed the corporate landscape, reducing real
salaries and making competition for work and advancement stiffer. I'm not
making a value judgment, just an observation. Life has changed greatly since
the middle of the 20th century. Perhaps I'll hear from other about this on
the list.
When US newspapers conduct a survey about readership the two most common
reasons cited for not subscribing or reading are 1) no time to read and 2)
papers pile up unread. Publishers cite lifestyle (above) and competition as
the problems. Newspapers have invested in money-losing internet sites just
to stay in the game, without really knowing what the game is. Profitability
of news websites is extremely rare based on advertising. This may change in
the future. But then, some expect the presses to stop turning, too.
As a result of all of this, there are few two newspaper cities left in the
US. In most cities where two papers are still competing the papers have
moved to what we call JOA, or joint operating agreement. In this situation,
each paper typically keeps their own editorial staff but share circulation,
press and administrative resources. Eventually, one buys out the other.
Most newspaper are still profitable but they have had to move into new
sources of income such as database marketing, commercial printing, etc.
Television stations (local) are struggling. At least they were two years
ago. There are few profitable TV stations any more. The cable and satellite
business has sucked the life out of them. Time-stressed consumers will turn
to local television for local news, sometimes because they can do two things
at one time, i.e., feed the baby, clean the house. So, the prevailing theory
is that TV has become something of a fall-back resource for those who do not
read newspapers anymore. TV is passive. Even the internet, like a newspaper,
requires your attention to use.
You can learn more about this at the Newspaper Association of America's
website:
http://www.naa.org/
However, keep in mind that this organization promotes newspapers. It does
have a great research arm and provides excellent national readership
information, thus helping newspapers to overcome their challenges.
I can't comment on the southern European scene you asked about. However, it
is clear here in Finland that newspapers are well-read and television (and
radio) is much less used. Part of the reason I chose Finland for my master's
degree was the high newspaper readership numbers here. It fascinated me.
Also, the high price (2 euros) of a single copy newspaper compared to $0.25
to $0.50 in the USA is interesting. To top it off, the Finnish newspapers
even sell advertising on the front page, something the US papers would be
run out of town for.
Terve ja hyvää Vappu...
Steve Crawford
On 27/4/03 10:33 pm, "Amin Alhassan" <dagomba2001@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
Steven,
>
Heipa! I was particularly struck by the conclusion you
>
reached with your study of newspaper readership in the
>
US. You attribute the decline to a simple causal fact
>
of the fast paced life in the US. Hmmm. Has the same
>
fast paced life affected TV viewing? Or is there a
>
relationship between TV viewing and decline in
>
Newspaper reading in the US.
>
>
How will you relate your study to the fact that
>
Southern Europeans watch more TV that read newspers
>
compared to their Northern counterparts who read more
>
than watch? Just thinking out these questions.
>
>
Hyvaa viikonluppu
>
Amin Alhassan
>
Montreal
>
>
--- Steven Crawford <scrawfo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
In 2000 I conducted a
>
> study about why newspaper readership in the USA is
>
> down in the dumps. The
>
> answer was simple: no time to read! Particularly for
>
> women.
****************************************************************************
Steve Crawford
Tiedottaja (englanti)
Information Officer
University of Jyväskylä
Mattilanniemi 2, Agora B 435.2
40014 Finland
****************************************************************************
---
You are currently subscribed to cultstud-l as: gcsg-cultstud-l@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-cultstud-l-144941Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The FAQ:
http://www.cas.usf.edu/communication/rodman/cultstud/faq.html