His latest post for his Reflections of a Newsosaur blog is the first of a two-part series on the future of the newspaper. In it, Alan Mutter examines the consumer demand for the print publication.

He crunches numbers conservatively and concludes that the demand will decline, but not precipitously. By 2025, there will be a drop of 27 per cent and by 2040 a nearly 50-per-cent decline.

That still leaves newspapers in a reasonable condition as a consumer good. What isn't clear is whether advertising will depart in a disproportionate way and migrate to the related digital platform of a newsroom in a helpful way.

Another big issue: "The question for publishers is how long their audience will be large enough to justify the enormous expense of owning and operating the massive and inefficient infrastructure they use to manufacture and distribute newspapers."

The next instalment will deal with that issue.
 
 
The former CEO of Perseus Books Group posts a strong argument that the adoption of the electronic reading device --- the e-reader of the e-book --- is going to take longer than the enthusiasts think.

Jack McKeown, now a consultant and vice president of the Verso Digital ad network for publishers, believes three issues stand in the way of the disruptive technological breakthrough akin to the MP3 player:

1. The e-book doesn't deliver the same value as the printed edition. Principally he says the experience of screen reading still isn't up to the standard of ink on paper, but he also suggests that the e-reader's computing capabilities are inhibiting note-taking.

2. The e-reader manufacturers may not understand the book-buying demographic. They seem more interested in the 18-to-34 age group, not the book buyers.

3. Pricing and distribution issues abound. There is no common platform or approach to cost.

While there is little question the transformation of the publishing industry is upon us, "if anyone out there assumes that the outcome is a slam dunk, guess again," McKeown writes.
 
 
Google has indicated it is preparing a micropayment plan newspaper publishers could use in the coming year.

It would charge anything from a penny to several dollars for access to content across several merchants and over time. It would share revenue in what it calls a "premium content ecosystem" of syndication, third-party arrangements and feeds and fees. Google's Checkout service appears to be part of the platform.

Google suggests micropayment plans are not going to solve economic challenges, but that they could be part of the solution. While it is not the panacea, it is a significant gesture of possible assistance. The move is a surprise, considering the testy relationship newspapers have recently had with the search engine giant.

Google submitted the document, available below (the Nieman Journalism Lab obtained it), in response to the Newspaper Association of America's call for online business model proposals from industry.
 
 
The Times of London is reporting that the Taiwanese computer company, Asus, renowned for its affordable netbooks, is about to enter the e-book race with a lower-priced unit than the popular Kindle.

According to the Times, Asus will release two models, with the lowest priced at about 100 pounds. It isn't clear if Asus will link the technology to a publishing distribution system or to other content --- the Kindle is, of course, an extension of Amazon.com and has deals with several print organizations.

But what is a major development is the format of the Asus unit: full-colour and hinged to emulate the reading experience. One of those two screens can be used as a keyboard.

With Sony readying a new unit at less than $200, and Plastic Logic in the wings, the race is going to heat up in the months to come. Still, recent research from Forrester indicates mass appeal depends very much on a much lower price point, no more than $100 and as little as $50.
 
 

Jeff Jarvis has put his new book into a precis. The PowerPoint is here.

 
 

The Monday Note suggests looking at a paid online model again in light of media business models under siege. It also suggests that many free services could afford some sort of charge for premium users, but that publishers need to devise strategies to make such models attractive.
At the moment I'm offside on that idea. True, in some cases, offering free services alongside paid ones has stimulated support for the latter by the former. But so much media content is readily available as a commodity, it is hard to gauge where a paid model might enter within the traditional journalism model. Outside that model, with all sorts of functions for a community, it is possible. But I don't see anyone, save WSJ.com, keeping its content behind a firewall --- and even WSJ.com can be found by a reasonably experienced search engine user.

 
 

Marketing guru Seth Godin, author most recently of Tribes, discusses publishing and free content at the 26th Story site. His take: The business model for publishing needs to shift radically. The Internet and the market don't care if you make a profit, and the consumer will move away if, say, a Kindle book costs the same as an ink-on-paper book. The message: The market will expand if you think creatively about the value chain.
"The huge opportunity is for publishers to get unstuck."

 
 

Scott Karp, the prolific and often profound writer for the Publishing 2.0 blog, spends a lot of space making a nevertheless sound point: Design has to work or nothing else will. In his words, if your users fail, your Web site fails. He is critical of sites that require registration without making the case that it is in the user's interests. Whether the user succeeds is everything, he notes.

 
 

Critical to the evolution of journalism is the development of a new digital business model to support it. We can whinge all we like about fragmented audiences and the challenges facing conventional media, but we have to spend more time creating a sustainable form of support on the digital frontier or the effort to redevelop and strengthen journalism will fall on deaf ears.
Recently a number of experts on online publishing have confronted the basic wisdom that advertisers should be measuring effectiveness of campaigns on the basis of click-through traffic.
This is a significant development because it stands to deconstruct a model that is barely off the ground. No sooner have advertisers started spending online and measuring their reach through traffic metrics than did experts come along and say it's the wrong way to measure.
In the latest Online Publishing Insider blog, David Koretz echoes a sentiment emerging in the field that it's necessary to change the advertising experience online and develop new metrics. Mainly, though, he's suggesting clicks can hurt an advertiser or mislead one about the reach of the campaign.
In managing media, finding this new experience amounts to one more layer of challenge.

 
 

Jupiter Research's Barry Parr has outlined some best practices for news organizations in the Web 2.0 environment. His report is proprietary, but the David Card blog from Jupiter pointed to three elements of it this week:
1. Content creation and distribution should be separate businesses.
2. Widgets should be a key distribution strategy.
3. Partners are important as publishers consider themselves platforms.
If you think about what news organizations were thinking about two or three years ago, this makes your head spin.

 

DA25E68FDEC14EAFA7B2A27D26C48058