With the Seattle PI closing its doors in a couple more weeks, we in Seattle are dealing with the possibility of becoming a one-paper town for the first time in many a year. We've been lucky to have two papers - as news media consolidates, its becoming harder and harder for even newspapers in one-paper towns to survive.
The outcry over the PI shutting down has primarily been over the loss of independent perspective and the role of the newspaper in everyday citizenry. As the "hard" news sources diminish (as opposed to local TV news), so will the public's knowledge in local affairs. The inference is that more bad will go unnoticed, more unjusts gone unpunished.
While I love the PI and would love to see them stay, my problem with this argument is that these are for-profit businesses. Its similar to the Sonics. When the Sonics left town, there was a great outcry over how Howard Schultz sold the city out - this was a Seattle institution, a cultural icon. In reality, its a business. The point is, as long as the PI and the Sonics are profit-making concerns, you can't treat them like they are vital public institutions.
This opinion piece from the Huffington Post caught my eye, where the author argues the solution for newspapers is to charge a fee per click (micro-payments). The problem with its thesis is obvious - there are too many free outlets out there. Your AP wire article isn't going to be paid for when I can just go to CNN for the same article. As for the columnists (such as one of my favorites, PI's Art Thiel), they've been replaced by an army of knowledgeable, ad-supported bloggers. People aren't going to pay for this content.
So in summary, you have a failing for-profit business in a zero profit business model. Not only that, but you claim to be a civic institution. So maybe the solution to saving the newspaper is that they make the true leap into becoming a civic institution and go non-profit? After all, in a two-paper town, you have some loyalties when it comes to which paper people like to take into the bathroom stall. Maybe those loyalties are strong enough to save your business?
That means not charging for content, but asking for donations and raising money. It is possible...look at the music industry. KEXP.org is a great example of a "civic" institution growing against all odds (i.e. vs. Itunes, Pandora, Virgin, etc). How do they stay alive? Because four times a year, they ask for donations. They raise money. And every year they grow and expand because their listeners love the product. The same can be said with NPR.
Would Hearst ever go non-profit to save their paper? Hell no. They are a business. But in the new business environment, as long as news owners are in it for the money, they won't make any money - if that makes sense.
Comments