Print

[PaddyJoe]

Newsweek is to go web only in 2013. Looks like a sign of things to come.
The Guardian is rumoured to be considering ending print as well.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-newsweek.html

[Dr. FIVE]

Guardian thing was just the Telegrapgh talking *****

[Count Bobulescu]

Newsweek is to go web only in 2013. Looks like a sign of things to come.
The Guardian is rumoured to be considering ending print as well.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-newsweek.html

More on Newsweek. I noted somewhere, up thread I think, that Newsweek has come in for a lot of criticism recently.

In a momentous (though not totally unforeseen) development, Newsweek editor Tina Brown announced this morning that the magazine will move to an all-digital format and shutter the print edition just shy of its 80th birthday. In a post on the magazine's website—which Brown folded into TheDailyBeast.com in 2010—she unveiled the new online-only plan for an once-iconic magazine that first began publishing in February of 1933. The magazine will be renamed Newsweek Global, focus on paid subscriptions, and ramp up the importance of e-reader and tablet editions. The last paper issue will be published on December 31.
Brown's post was a modified version of an internal email (posted to the Newsweek Tumblr) that also warns employees about anticipated layoffs and restructuring.

The eventual fate of the Newsweek brand appeared inevitable after the merger with The Daily Beast in 2010, which even included the loss of its URL. The entire concept of weekly news magazines has become outdated, as has the economics of print media in general. (The magazine is expected to lose about $40 million dollars this year, according David Carr of The New York Times. IAC chairman Barry Diller (who owns half the company) even hinted that this might happen the summer, though he quickly backpedaled on the idea that the print side would shut down completely. Brown called it "scaremongering."

However, Brown's strategy seemed to continually push the Newsweek half of Newsweek/Daily Beast to the back burner—when she wasn't cooking up desperate, attention-seeking covers. It was becoming harder and harder to imagine a world in which the magazine might thrive again, but perhaps few expected the end to come soon or so abruptly. Brown writes that she's looking ahead to the "the 80th anniversary of Newsweek next year," but now that day will be more like a funeral.

and this

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.co...t-end-of-year/

[Count Bobulescu]

Guardian thing was just the Telegrapgh talking *****

I dunno about the Guardian.............

They’ve made some recent changes that may point in that direction. They’ve added a US specific front page option. They are by far the most widely read UK newspaper in the US, all of whom are online. If they reach the point that the Economist has, where US readership surpasses UK readership then the advertising/economics relationship changes and the print option becomes less important and less attractive. Of all UK daily’s only the Independent has a smaller print circulation, so it would make sense.

[Kev Bar]

Soon there will not be a job to say 'give us'!

And here's me hustling like a lunatic for a string or two to get me to Phnom Penh.

[Count Bobulescu]

Soon there will not be a job to say 'give us'!

And here's me hustling like a lunatic for a string or two to get me to Phnom Penh.

I hear ya Kev.

[Count Bobulescu]

This year will be the last that Newsweek publishes a print magazine. With these sort of things, the reaction among journalists is always a strange mix of sorrow, schadenfreude, and giddy relief. Many people seemed to say Newsweek's demise was a moral punishment for Tina Brown's increasingly desperate covers. But Newsweek was drowning before Brown found it. To say the magazine died from sensationalism is like saying Titanic passengers died from screaming too loudly.
This is an economic story, plain and simple. The print news business is grim and hardly needs a lengthy explication. The best print-and-save metaphor comes from James Fallows' analysis of Newsweek's plight back in May of 2010.
This isn't Newsweek's plight. It's print's plight. Newsweek just feels the sting more acutely because it prints 40+ times a year as opposed to 10 times a year. Attention is fleeing paper publications even faster than advertising is abandoning them.

If you want to know why Newsweek won't be the last major print magazine to shut down print operations in the next few years, this is the graph to remember:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...wsweek/263814/

[Dr. FIVE]

Not print but salute to huffpo headline writers

[Count Bobulescu]

Rupee reported to be going on a buying spree after the News Corp split.

Rupert Murdoch wants to add two new gems to his soon-to-be-formed publishing company after News Corp. splits into two pieces, and his wandering eyes are focusing on the L.A. Times and the Chicago Tribune.

The L.A. Times' Meg James reports Murdoch has had preliminary talks with Tribune Co.'s owners about purchasing the two papers. Tribune Co. will emerge from bankruptcy soon and the two banks and investment firm that will become majority owners of the company want to unload the struggling papers.
Murdoch, the world's biggest newsprint romantic, is especially infatuated with the Times. "On trips to Los Angeles, he is known to mark up [the Times] with a Sharpie pen to illustrate how he would design pages," James writes. He also has a long standing mutual relationship with the Tribune. They print his Wall Street Journal in California and in Chicago.

It's not the first time this week we've heard about Murdoch's interest in the Times. The Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that he was expected to pursue, "acquisitions of distressed newspapers, such as the Los Angeles Times," after the News Corp. split. There were also rumors of his interest in the Times in June. Daily Intel's Joe Coscarelli called the Tuesday report the "media mogul equivalent of flirting," which we're not disagreeing with. If anything, the Times report on Murdoch's interest is the media equivalent of them flirting back. They're giving him the eyes, as it were. The Times report cites two other potential buyers, but it's Murdoch's name in the headline.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...2.story?page=1

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/...jAxODY3Wj.html

[Dr. FIVE]

That conflicting feeling when you find your tweets reprinted in the Indo : /

[PaddyJoe]

That conflicting feeling when you find your tweets reprinted in the Indo : /

Gwan boy. Whass the story?

[Dr. FIVE]

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/le...l-2619460.html

[PaddyJoe]

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/le...l-2619460.html

+1
:d

[Baron von Biffo]

"Enda Kenny says "We're stuck with it" on the 110 appointments made by Fianna Fail just before leaving office."

That you Doc?

[Dr. FIVE]

The Galway Indo comes in the door every week and usually ends up the fire but Im in there every second week too it seems

We need a root and branch reform of clichéd excuses

Des Bishop on one. Craig Doyle on two. Have we left the euro or something?

Bring me the head of Michael Portillo.

lol

Many TDs have perfect attendance records but are yet to make a worthwhile contribution to the Dáil.

Think there is more, surely reprinting tweets is an odd form of journalism but whatever