All Paper, No News

I'm curious why you think that Jacobson is accountable to you and your definition of a "newspaper" (your definition, when compared to say, Merriam-Webster's, is rather limited)?


By other definitions his paper (from what the Times has mentioned about it) fits the more general definition of what a newspaper is.


Also, I don't know that he really displays contempt for the web. Every quote of his is in reference to his belief of the effect it would have on the newspaper and it's business, not on the web in general. He even says that he would move to the web if the current model stops working.


The use of the term "contempt for our medium" (your medium? As in you own it? Or the medium in which you choose to engage in?) as well as the voracious defense of the it and your unjustified (you indicate that you haven't seen the newspaper) indicate that you might have personalized the story (which we are all wont to do).


In the end, he has a business model that is successful which doesn't involve a medium which you are so closely tied to. He has advertisers that pay (which surely wouldn't pay if the advertising wasn't helping) and readers that consume what he produces.


Surely there is room in the world for that?

*All* newspapers put their advertisers first. They always have done. The advertisers come first. The adverts themselves come first - they get first choice of position on the printed page. The journalism is squeezed into the gaps between the ads. Jacobson is by no means alone among editors in this respect.

Sorry, I just have to point out that I find it funny that you felt it necessary to put a [sic] next to "e-mail" in your second to the last paragraph. "E-mail" is still AP style and NY Times style, so it's not unusual he would spell it that way.

(And I mean funny in a quasi-humorous, innocent sort of way. I giggled, a tad.)

Seriously, Anil. You went to the business section of the paper, and read an interview with the publisher (the guy who ensures the newspaper stays in business) and then you are aghast that he talks about business?

And don't say that he should be talking about news because news is their business. He was interviewed about his business model and why he hasn't gone for the web in a big way, and the writer focused the questions there and wrote them focused on business. For all you know, this reporter and the publisher could have chatted for an hour about some great work they did on the investigative/writing side, or how they're proud of the local angle they achieve, but the 1118 word article chose what it did and went from there.

Did you e-mail David Carr (carr@nytimes.com), the writer, to find out if this other bit was discussed? Probably not. That would be journalistic.

You are obviously not familiar with Tri City. It's by no means a penny saver. In fact, it is the only "news" paper in Monmouth County, NJ (actually of of NJ for that matter) worth reading. I'm an avid reader and have been for a long time. It's been great to see where they began at I think 12 pages to their most current issue which was 76 pages. Tri City's off-color commentary on everything from creative local business, art, music, local politics, architecture, urban redevelopment, etc. is refreshing to say the least. Perhaps you should pick up a copy before commenting on it's editorial which believe me, is unlike anything you've ever read. I compare it to the Howard Stern of the print world although not quite that extreme but definitely edgy. Some people don't like filthy language but I always laugh at some of the language I see in Tri City. THey tell it like it is without fear of losing advertising (I once heard a story of some of their advertisers bailing on them because of what they read in the paper). And I only wish more media would do the same. Kudos to Tri City. Keep up the good work and congrat on the NYT article.

I don't think its that they don't want you to read it. I just think that if you are outside their distribution area and want to access their content online, that in effect, will cannibalize their print edition which will ultimately lead to them going out of business like so many others in the newspaper business and then you won't be able to read anything in their paper at all. BECAUSE THEY WON"T BE IN BUSINESS ANYMORE. Excuse me for being perplexed that you can make this statement: "Thus, I submit that the triCityNews, while certainly a paper, is likely not a newspaper" without having ever picked the thing up before. What kind of journalism is that? You make an assumption without having any facts to back it up.

This whole story, including all the comments, is fascinating. One of the unspoken things that comes out of products like the TriCity News is the distribution model. I can't remember if any of the stories around them mention if they are free-distribution, but I suspect they must be.

Free distribution products are fundamentally different from the ol' paid circulation model. They're more like direct mail to a targeted geographic region.

This is why the TriCity News and other products like them don't need a web presence (except for sales, promotional or production purposes). It doesn't matter.

This may end up being a model followed by smaller regional products: news, commentary and other editorial-like content is used as a hook to wrap eye-balls in a particular region around the 'beautiful' ads.

If I could hazard a guess, I bet they make a few nickels off inserts from local grocers and big-box retailers that need to get their flyers out to their audience.

I'm guessing a similar approach would have been employed by the enterprising buggy whip entrepreneurs of their day:

"These new fangled horseless buggies really don't appeal to our customer base. I don't see the need to anticipate a future without horse drawn carriages. We focus on the need we have in front of us and let the future take care of itself."

Okay then. I can't argue with your short term business model if it's true that your customers don't care. Some day they will. And if your stock holders accept a business model based on ignorance then I guess they will all get what they deserve when the horseless carriage of this day go away.

Sorry. The proper way to spell the word is "e-mail", since the "e" is for "electronic". I would expect you, of all people, to know this.

I read a number of comments about this story. Having family members working in the newspaper business. I hope that triCity's business model holds up for them, but I think that model is dying elsewhere.

A number of zero-price weeklies (complete with full-color display ads) are still not making ends meet. For one thing, readers aren't willing to page through the paper when the significant items were covered on TV, radio, and the Web hours or days before the paper is delivered.

With subscription papers, the problem is even worse, because readers are questioning why they pay so much for the same content they already obtained elsewhere. Plus, even with the subscription, the paper pays its bills with advertising revenue.

I'm expecting that even more papers will close down their print operations and rely on a much smaller Web presence for their future survival. Maybe Jacobson's paper will be an exception, but I doubt it.

Check out Dan Jaconson's radio interview with CBS radio here: http://www.wcbs880.com/pages/podcast/91.rss

Just scroll downt o about the middle of the page. Very interesting and gives you some good insight into the paper's success. Most interesting comment from Jacobson in the interview is that triCity's content, first and foremost, is why the paper has had such success.