Dow Jones is now estimated to be worth less than half of what News Corp pays for it - and the dot com version like other web services, are able to free-ride off of the hard news portion. Would WSJ as a standalone entity be profitable if it had to support all the print reporters who generate its content? I have serious doubts.
Newspapers might be a day old recap, but chron.com isn't. If you think CNN and ESPN are capable of having successful Houston affiliates, maybe you're right, but I have my doubts. I think they'll continue their regional emphasis on target areas (NY, Boston, LA, etc.) and leave a giant hole for most of the country. When it comes to news on the Astros, Rockets and Texans, I don't see ESPN coming anywhere close to the Chronicle. Maybe I'll be wrong, but I doubt it.
Not really. Newspapers generally hit their circulation peak around 1990 -- right before the rise of the internet. http://www.journalism.org/node/793 I'm not blaming the internet — obviously, technology is a great thing. But newspaper executives didn't anticipate its importance enough in its infancy stages, and they're paying for it now.
I'll keep my ears open and let you know if I hear anything. Unfortunalty a couple writers/editors I know are also out of work. Tough times abound.
that's what i'm saying. i remember the NYTimes used to limit part of their online content to hard copy subscribers or for a fee. they realized that wouldn't fly and had to open it up to everyone lest they become obsolete. one would think that if any newspaper would be safe it would be them but i'm sure they're feeling it as well.
Probably not, as I said, it will probably never be the same, I was merely using that as an example that a shift to other media is possible, and happening, and that there will be a need for these people eventually by others who are making money off news, and do need professional journalists to fill the gaps left by the diminishing industry. Here's hoping that the change or at least an improvement/need in other areas for folks hit by this doesn't take too long, and the diminishing for the rest doesn't happen too fast. Thoughts out to those who are caught up in it, whether they saw it coming or not.
You are right on the money. There are people who work in the tv news industry that say local sportscast are pointless with ESPN SportsCenter and such. They obviously have never watched SportsCenter because there are many times they may show just a couple of highlights of a Rockets game (for example) and rarely interview any of the players. Many tv consultants fail to realize that the LOCAL stations try to give the LOCAL fans information they can't get anywhere else. The same with the Chronicle. A big part of the GARM is made from topics started in the Chron. Do you think ESPN, SI.COM, Yahoo Sports cares about Luis Scola? Matt Schaub? Lance Berkman?
Cutting the local sports seems pretty damn stupid. I thought cutting the Longhorn and Aggie beat writers was dumb. This would be the final straw. If I had the capital, I could easily start a sports website that would crush the Chronicle's coverage of anything. They act like they invented the wheel.
That's messed up, but I think Mike Murphy was the only really prominent writer of that group. I see they laid off two brothas. I remember a few years ago in a thread about black sports media member, Trader_Jorge went on this rant with the assumption that murphy was black so I guess they laid off three. don't ask my how I remember that
I agree. Cut out the guys who write on stuff that's already being covered by larger, national press. But don't cut out the local story angles...focus on that, instead.
