A new look for the Independent. Not sure I like this much. It looks like a local paper, or a student paper as someone else put it, or Russian. Maybe it was just what the boss ordered.
The logo is the big change and it is big. I’m guessing they were thinking modern and bold.
With the word ‘The’ shrinking the focus is much more on a “stronger Independent”. Read more »
No one can have now not caught something of the astonishing tale of Johann Hari the award-winning Independent columnist (winner of many prizes including the Orwell prize, since handed back) who after admitting plagiarism, and attacking fellow journalists on Wikipedia under a pseudonym, is to keep his job. Lucky man.
Yesterday he made a long apology in the Independent where he explained how he had embellished some of his stories and appropriated the quotes of others to use in his stories, it was contrite but it didn’t seem all that sincere or rather he didn’t really address the failings that led to this incredible story, which cast a shadow over dozens of articles. Read more »
Roger Alton, who stepped down as editor of the Independent last month, has been named as an executive editor of The Times the day it unveils its new website.
The news broke late last night when the paper’s other executive editor Daniel Finkelstein, who is responsible for digital content, broke the news via a tweet.
For my money the Independent easily won the battle of the front pages today with its “brokered Britain front page splash” while the Daily Mail made me come over all queasy.
When the fate of some newspapers is to disappear for good Guardian News & Media’s decision to pare down The Observer to four sections rather than close it outright was clearly a tough one in this climate, but it makes a lot of sense and it should be congratulated.
As reported last night The Observer will shrink from seven to four sections having been under threat of closure since August. Its sport, music and Woman monthly magazines will close and there will be some redundancies.
Guardian News & Media said it will fold the business and personal finance sections into the main paper, and the travel section into the Observer Magazine. Only Observer Food Monthly will survive the magazine cull.
Hopefully the resulting newspaper will be smaller, but perfectly formed. Besides, I’d rather have a paper like the Observer on Sunday or frankly The Guardian that doesn’t suffer from over publishing that to my mind afflicts some Sunday newspapers where I am left asking “what is the point of this section – could you remind me (other than to recycle”.
Paring The Observer down to the bare essentials described above still makes it a better paper than the Independent on Sunday (it is still publishing, right?) and The Sunday Times, which is a paper that can be best described as: “used to be pretty good”.
The best Sunday paper is still the Guardian on Saturday as like a trip to Parisa it’s a two day affair.
It is a shame about the magazines as the Observer team did a great job producing them, but again there was always the nagging question in my mind as to whether that was what it should have been spending its money on. Yes they were good, but I was never sure whether they belonged in a Sunday newspaper (that could just be me, it is not unknown). The food mag is awesome though and I’m glad to see that continue.
I could say more, but really I’m glad to see the paper continue.
Let’s hope it is the nuclear option and it does not come to Guardian Media Group having to close The Observer newspaper. It would be tragic loss and would lead many people to have few options on a Sunday.
Guardian Media Group chief executive, Carolyn McCall, has confirmed in a memo that executives are looking at all options to cut growing losses, including closing The Observer, to ensure the future of The Guardian. As that’s what the Scott Trust is in business to do.
GMG will have to make some really tough choices. Advertising revenues are falling and it looks like these will not return to pre-downturn levels. The Guardian Media Group has losses in the 12 months to March of £90m. Those are serious losses and require serious action. A smattering of job cuts and merging web operations of the Guardian and The Observer clearly do not go far enough in addressing the scale of the problem. Otherwise we wouldn’t be here.
The Observer might sell 409,000 plus copies, but its circulation is falling and there are no signs that its decline will be arrested. This is not a market where we are going to see sustained rises in newspaper circulation that are anything more than quick hits based on short term promotions or news cycles.
So what to do? People don’t often close newspapers, but it happens that it just hasn’t happened for a long while.
If you do a search or think back there is a veritable pile of dead papers filling the bins of prosperity. The News on Sunday, Eddie Shah’s Today and The Post, London Daily News, The Sunday Correspondent and Sunday Business. Admittedly some of those did not last very long and certainly have not
been in continuous publication since the latter part of the 18th
century.
Is the Independent being sold? There’s something happening, what is it exactly? Independent News and Media Chief Executive Gavin O’Reilly has said today there have been no talks with Russian billionaire Alexander Lebedev.
O’Reilly’s comments follow yesterday’s lunchtime story that Lebedev was in advanced talks about buying the paper.
Speaking today to a Dow Jones reporter at IN&M’s annual general meeting O’Reilly said that he’s received no offer for the group’s UK titles and has had no discussions.
“The board hasn’t received any offer whatsoever from Mr Lebedev. The press has got ahead of itself.
“I’ve had no discussions [with Lebedev]. The board has had no discussion.”
It’s an interesting turn of phrase — the bit about “the press getting ahead of itself”. It could simply be that there’s no story, but it seems from the various reports I’ve read that there is something is going on.
Maybe it isn’t a sale. Maybe only closer relations (so to speak). I still think anyone would be bonkers to buy The Independent outright. It makes no sense – even if you’re a billionaire. The future is not bright for The Independent. It still remains a candidate for becoming an online-only title. I’ve written about this once (No independent future – merger, digital or bust) or twice (The end of print for The Independent?) before.
Someone is sitting around with a slide rule today trying to workout what to do about the Independent. Reports say it is up for sale with a merger with the Evening Standard as one option, outright closure a possibility, and going online only another. But is a digital only future really an option at all?
The Times reported today that Sir Anthony O’Reilly is actively seeking to sell The Independent 11 years after he took control of the title.It follows reports at the weekend of the huge debts that O’Reilly and his fellow investor Denis O’Brien are dealing with.
That means finding a buyer for a title that despite tough cost cutting, is suffering unsustainable losses. This is a point conceded by O’Reilly.
The options are finding investors, find a buyer or close the paper. The strongest current of speculation is that Alexander Lebedev, the Russian oligarch who bought the Standard in January, will emerge as The Independent’s owner.
If he does it seems unlikely he will continue to publish the two papers separately, opening the way for a merger that could create a new stronger more stable paper. It is the kind of reshaping of the landscape that the downturn, the decline of print, seems to demand.
If Lebedev did buy it, but decides to keep it separate, the option is to cut further and to possibly only publish it online.
There was some discussion of this last year when I blogged about it following a post by Roy Greenslade.
It is too early to tell how a newspaper making a switch to online only will fare. Will its traffic surge or will those readers without a print anchor cut loose and drift elsewhere.
There are simply not enough examples or data around and that which we do have is flawed.
For instance, just weeks into life as an online only publication, web traffic for Seattlepi.com (what used to be the Seattle Post-Intelligencer) is down significantly, while former rival the Seattle Times got a big boost in online readers, according to Nielsen Online.
However, Hearst is disputing the Nielsen figures and says they are flawed. It claims its internal tracking service show that Seattlepi.com traffic jumped nearly 10%.
In an editorial today The Economist joins the growing chatter that says the days of (entirely) free content are over. It does so as The Independent and The Times are revealed to be looking seriously at paid-for content.
In a piece titled ‘The end of the free lunch’, The Economist gives us this:
“In recent years, consumers have become used to feasting on online freebies of all sorts: news, share quotes, music, email and even speedy internet access. These days, however, dotcoms are not making news with yet more free offerings, but with layoffs and with announcements that they are to start charging for their services.”
It seems, almost, to be describing the current situation, but then comes the punch line: that was printed in The Economist back in April 2001, but it is entirely applicable to where we are today.
Giving away content in the hope that advertising revenue will materialise later on has been hugely appealing to all, not least to users who have enjoyed free services. But as The Economist point out, with not enough advertising revenue to go around, the lessons of two internet bubbles have taught us that “somebody somewhere is going to have to pick up the tab for lunch”.
The paper concludes that the demise of a popular but unsustainable business model (of free content) now seems inevitable.
Time Inc has mooted charging as has The New York Times and the Guardian seems as keen as anyone. It is also being reported that newspapers including The Times and Independent are considering introducing paid-for content on their sites.
It will only take one or two, a little trickle, before it turns into a steady flow. In just a few short weeks the language has already started to rapidly change. As journalists lose their jobs and newspapers are threatened there has been a step change.
Gavin O’Reilly, the new chief executive of Independent News & Media told the Daily Telegraph that “it is obviously necessary”.
No longer simply desirable or nice – but necessary. He added: “We have got to respect the value of our writers. There is a fine balance. I want to look at online in that regard.”
The paper also reported that News International was looking to find its own paid-for model.
What will that be? People talk micro payments and subscription.
What I am completely convinced of is that no one in the wider world, outside of the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times, will be successfully able to charge for news.
News was and is even more so today a commodity. Valuable as it is, it is also too cheap and too easy to replicate to be charged for – except maybe in a historical archive – but increasingly I think that ship has also sailed.
It is the other content – the words, the insight, video and audio that cannot be replicated that demands some kind of premium price tag.
Haymarket Business Media © 1957 – 2012
