<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>The Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in Newspaper Deathwatch?</title><link>http://tlf.disqus.com/</link><description>The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:08:49 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Newspaper Deathwatch?</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2008/07/18/newspaper-deathwatch/#comment-1455008</link><description>Wow, E.W. Scripps says second-quarter profit fell 48 percent...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Earns-Scripps.html?_r=1&amp;oref;=slogin" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Ear...&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Adam_Thierer</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:08:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Newspaper Deathwatch?</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2008/07/18/newspaper-deathwatch/#comment-1455007</link><description>Alan... The market cap valuation in that bubble chart is as of January. We haven't updated it recently but I plant to try to do so again soon.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Adam_Thierer</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:32:48 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Newspaper Deathwatch?</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2008/07/18/newspaper-deathwatch/#comment-1455009</link><description>Great post.  I love grid comparing the valuation bubbles of newspapers and Google but you need to fix the SSP valuation. It really is about $500M, not the $1.5B erroneously reported by some websites that failed to take into account he 3-for-1 reverse stock split last week.  If you update the graphic, please let me know and I will try to link to it next time I write about this stuff.  Thanks.  adm</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alan Mutter</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:16:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Newspaper Deathwatch?</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2008/07/18/newspaper-deathwatch/#comment-1455006</link><description>Hi Adam, I am back from vacation!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Two questions:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;1. From the newspaper circulation chart, it seems that there was an inflection point in the number of daily newspapers around 1980.  The circulation drop off started a little later (about 1991).  Those dates both seem a little earlier to be ascribed to the growth of the internet--so to what to you ascribes those drop-offs?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;2. I wonder if you have an opinion on the newspapers as not for profit phenomena/trend I'd remarked upon earlier in several posts.  That phenomena would address almost all of your concerns, as follows:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;* loss of protected markets or “protected scarcity” = there’s just no guaranteed audience anymore&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;Interesting effect here: this will result in non-profit newspapers being be judged qualitatively, not quantitatively.  Patrons/those who manage the foundations will be empowered, but the connectivity of the newspapers will equal their relevance, so that qualitative judgment can not happen in a vacuum&lt;/b&gt; &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;* rapid technological change = the way media is created and transmitted has been completely transformed&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt; These not for profits will not have any problem with these--a web presence will be to their benefit, to reduce costs.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;* massive inflow of new competitors / platforms = no way to stop the deluge of new voices, including user-generated content&lt;b&gt;Platforms are not a problem-perhaps the deluge/information overload is, but as a not for profit, with ostensibly public spirited goals, these entities should be able to make connections.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;* loss of consumer confidence and allegiance = people have plenty of other places to turn their attention&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt; Branding of non-profits, intelligently done, can overcome this.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;br&gt;* loss of advertiser confidence and allegiance = advertisers have plenty of other places to promote their goods and services (including direct-to-consumer appeals and ‘word-of-mouth’ marketing efforts)&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt; This process is good for not for profits--it increases the burdens on their competitors as they lose market share&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;* loss of investor confidence and allegiance = shareholders have lots of other places to invest their capital today &lt;b&gt; Those who donate to non-profit newspapers will be seen a public spirited philanthropists, and the less strings they attach the more public spirited they will seem; the non-profits will encourage this by maintaining transparency of their operations, including fund raising.  The transparency meme will defang non-public spirited special interest groups.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Cheers!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;e_f</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eee_eff</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:27:29 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>