menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: Its The End Of The Post As We Know It
Page: 1 of 3
mail
person
rpbobcat
1/15/2016 7:19 AM
According to an Op-Ed piece in today's (1/15/16) The Post,starting in the Fall,they will stop their daily print edition.
They will instead print a weekly tabloid and go to a "digital first" format.
Last Edited: 1/15/2016 7:28:44 AM by rpbobcat
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
1/15/2016 9:19 AM
Damn you, InterWebs!!!
mail
UpSan Bobcat
1/15/2016 10:47 AM
As a journalist myself, it's sad to see the change, but it makes sense. That's the way all newspapers are heading.
mail
Mike Johnson
1/15/2016 2:07 PM
UpSan Bobcat wrote:expand_more
As a journalist myself, it's sad to see the change, but it makes sense. That's the way all newspapers are heading.
Agree -sadly.

A few days ago, The Plain Dealer jacked its news stand price from $1 to $1.50, and The Wall Street Journal boosted its price to $3 at least a year ago. I wonder what if any effect those boosts are having on print readership. Many guys like me - newspaper junkies for 60 years - will keep paying. But younger folks...not so much.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
1/15/2016 3:21 PM
Mike Johnson wrote:expand_more
As a journalist myself, it's sad to see the change, but it makes sense. That's the way all newspapers are heading.
Agree -sadly.

A few days ago, The Plain Dealer jacked its news stand price from $1 to $1.50, and The Wall Street Journal boosted its price to $3 at least a year ago. I wonder what if any effect those boosts are having on print readership. Many guys like me - newspaper junkies for 60 years - will keep paying. But younger folks...not so much.
Can someone please tell Trump that, he keeps alluding to lower readerships equalling bad people, not changing times
mail
person
Ohio69
1/15/2016 3:38 PM
Online just ain't the same. Whether The Post or any other newspaper.

One of the things I miss is grabbing a paper and looking through all the baseball box scores while eating breakfast. Now I have to click here, and click back, and click again. And mute whatever dumb video or commercial that pops up without me selecting it. Its not better....at all.

Oh well. The Post is dead. Long live the Post.
Last Edited: 1/15/2016 3:39:34 PM by Ohio69
mail
TWT
1/16/2016 10:25 AM
Why is it necessary to cancel the newspaper edition of The Post? Its not a profit-loss paper its a student newspaper. If student's aren't picking up as many copies reduce circulation points.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
1/16/2016 10:43 AM
Maybe it's coming in line to future production of print media?
mail
person
Recovering Journalist
1/16/2016 11:59 AM
Uncle Wes wrote:expand_more
Why is it necessary to cancel the newspaper edition of The Post? Its not a profit-loss paper its a student newspaper. If student's aren't picking up as many copies reduce circulation points.
Changing the print run from, say, 10,000 to 5,000 does not result in a printing costing half as much. The price per copy drops quickly on relatively low print runs like that. In other words, most of the cost is based on printing between one paper and 500, so ending printing altogether is the only way to really save.

I don't think this will change students' experiences working on the paper but it's hard to imagine it won't affect readership.
mail
person
cc-cat
1/16/2016 1:06 PM
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
mail
The Optimist
1/16/2016 1:57 PM
The only reason I'm getting the WSJ paper edition is because their initial trial fee for that and internet was the same price as only getting internet. Whenever they jack up my price I'll switch to only internet.
Last Edited: 1/16/2016 10:41:43 PM by The Optimist
mail
person
rpbobcat
1/16/2016 2:25 PM
cc-cat wrote:expand_more
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
With the print version any student could just pick up a copy and read it.

Now students will have to make a conscious effort to read it.
That's got to result in less readership.

Personally, I find trying to read papers on a screen really tough on the eyes.
Guess I'm a dinosaur, but I really like going through a "real" newspaper every morning.
mail
Pete Chouteau
1/16/2016 3:32 PM
Well, sure, it's the end of the The Post as we knew it.

But (as a print journalism grad that has managed a livelihood pushing water in multiple physical states) I'll posit that a job writing for The Post as a daily print newspaper doesn't prepare today's student for any position that exists any longer.

Just gonna have to be a different man. Time may change me. But I can't trace time.
mail
The Optimist
1/16/2016 10:35 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
With the print version any student could just pick up a copy and read it.

Now students will have to make a conscious effort to read it.
That's got to result in less readership.

Personally, I find trying to read papers on a screen really tough on the eyes.
Guess I'm a dinosaur, but I really like going through a "real" newspaper every morning.
Define "conscious effort"

It takes me a couple taps of my finger to open up Twitter, click a link to a post article from one of their writers who I already follow and start reading. And I literally will open my phone and start clicking around without thinking anything of it... I think for students today, opening up their phone to look at the internet is pretty much subconscious much of the time.
Last Edited: 1/16/2016 10:43:05 PM by The Optimist
mail
person
rpbobcat
1/17/2016 10:06 AM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
With the print version any student could just pick up a copy and read it.

Now students will have to make a conscious effort to read it.
That's got to result in less readership.

Personally, I find trying to read papers on a screen really tough on the eyes.
Guess I'm a dinosaur, but I really like going through a "real" newspaper every morning.
Define "conscious effort"

It takes me a couple taps of my finger to open up Twitter, click a link to a post article from one of their writers who I already follow and start reading. And I literally will open my phone and start clicking around without thinking anything of it... I think for students today, opening up their phone to look at the internet is pretty much subconscious much of the time.
T.O. I agree that, if you're interested,finding The Post on line isn't an issue.

What I was referring to is what I guess you'd call the "casual" reader.Instead a headline catching a student's attention,so that they pick up a copy of the paper,now a student will have to a make a conscious effort to read The Post and make that same effort every day.

Maybe I underestimate today's youth,but I think that going digital is going to reduce readership.
mail
The Optimist
1/17/2016 10:27 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
With the print version any student could just pick up a copy and read it.

Now students will have to make a conscious effort to read it.
That's got to result in less readership.

Personally, I find trying to read papers on a screen really tough on the eyes.
Guess I'm a dinosaur, but I really like going through a "real" newspaper every morning.
Define "conscious effort"

It takes me a couple taps of my finger to open up Twitter, click a link to a post article from one of their writers who I already follow and start reading. And I literally will open my phone and start clicking around without thinking anything of it... I think for students today, opening up their phone to look at the internet is pretty much subconscious much of the time.
T.O. I agree that, if you're interested,finding The Post on line isn't an issue.

What I was referring to is what I guess you'd call the "casual" reader.Instead a headline catching a student's attention,so that they pick up a copy of the paper,now a student will have to a make a conscious effort to read The Post and make that same effort every day.

Maybe I underestimate today's youth,but I think that going digital is going to reduce readership.
That makes sense. I think the new way you see casual readers reading The Post will be from people sharing articles on Facebook or Twitter. In the same way people will see the headline on a physical paper, if you see a headline that interests you there people might stop and read the article.

Not sure about overall #'s. In some ways, that is better because you have the potential for that type of thing to happen with alumni who were not in the range of the physical distribution. That said, this isn't anything new. It has been happening for years and I doubt it'll change from the physical paper going away.
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/18/2016 10:33 AM
Does anger require reading, being open to other points of view?

http://thehill.com/opinion/juan-williams/266155-juan-will...
mail
person
rpbobcat
1/18/2016 10:46 AM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
Does anger require reading, being open to other points of view?

http://thehill.com/opinion/juan-williams/266155-juan-will...
I understand topics going off on tangents.

But how is this in any way,shape or form related to The Post switching from print to digital for its daily edition ?
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/18/2016 1:54 PM
New media and its need for immediacy/content/beast-must-be-constantly-fed seem to have engendered a new approach to news/conversation/politics. So strident today.

When were used to the long form that was (was..gone now...) print's strength, it seems we had less volume (loudness, number of people) on the extremes.
mail
Mike Johnson
1/18/2016 3:19 PM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
New media and its need for immediacy/content/beast-must-be-constantly-fed seem to have engendered a new approach to news/conversation/politics. So strident today.

When were used to the long form that was (was..gone now...) print's strength, it seems we had less volume (loudness, number of people) on the extremes.
Did you see that the owner of Philadelphia's dailies sold them to a non-profit with the hope that it will keep print journalism strong in that city?
mail
DelBobcat
1/18/2016 6:50 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
With the print version any student could just pick up a copy and read it.

Now students will have to make a conscious effort to read it.
That's got to result in less readership.

Personally, I find trying to read papers on a screen really tough on the eyes.
Guess I'm a dinosaur, but I really like going through a "real" newspaper every morning.
Define "conscious effort"

It takes me a couple taps of my finger to open up Twitter, click a link to a post article from one of their writers who I already follow and start reading. And I literally will open my phone and start clicking around without thinking anything of it... I think for students today, opening up their phone to look at the internet is pretty much subconscious much of the time.
T.O. I agree that, if you're interested,finding The Post on line isn't an issue.

What I was referring to is what I guess you'd call the "casual" reader.Instead a headline catching a student's attention,so that they pick up a copy of the paper,now a student will have to a make a conscious effort to read The Post and make that same effort every day.

Maybe I underestimate today's youth,but I think that going digital is going to reduce readership.
I think you do underestimate today's youth. I receive the Sunday Inquirer, but all of my other news comes in digital form. Just about every one of my peers consciously seek out news and most of them use social media to curate it. I follow the WSJ, NY Times, Wash Post, Philly Inquirer, Cincinnati Enquirer, Dispatch, The Post, Athens News, etc. on Twitter. On my 40 minute train ride every morning I thumb through my feed and its like getting every single one of those papers delivered to me. You can't beat the convenience of that, and more information is available to me than was ever possible just ten years ago. I think this is the trend among my generation and I view it as a positive.
mail
The Optimist
1/18/2016 11:53 PM
DelBobcat wrote:expand_more
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
With the print version any student could just pick up a copy and read it.

Now students will have to make a conscious effort to read it.
That's got to result in less readership.

Personally, I find trying to read papers on a screen really tough on the eyes.
Guess I'm a dinosaur, but I really like going through a "real" newspaper every morning.
Define "conscious effort"

It takes me a couple taps of my finger to open up Twitter, click a link to a post article from one of their writers who I already follow and start reading. And I literally will open my phone and start clicking around without thinking anything of it... I think for students today, opening up their phone to look at the internet is pretty much subconscious much of the time.
T.O. I agree that, if you're interested,finding The Post on line isn't an issue.

What I was referring to is what I guess you'd call the "casual" reader.Instead a headline catching a student's attention,so that they pick up a copy of the paper,now a student will have to a make a conscious effort to read The Post and make that same effort every day.

Maybe I underestimate today's youth,but I think that going digital is going to reduce readership.
I think you do underestimate today's youth. I receive the Sunday Inquirer, but all of my other news comes in digital form. Just about every one of my peers consciously seek out news and most of them use social media to curate it. I follow the WSJ, NY Times, Wash Post, Philly Inquirer, Cincinnati Enquirer, Dispatch, The Post, Athens News, etc. on Twitter. On my 40 minute train ride every morning I thumb through my feed and its like getting every single one of those papers delivered to me. You can't beat the convenience of that, and more information is available to me than was ever possible just ten years ago. I think this is the trend among my generation and I view it as a positive.
Bingo.

I follow a huge diversity of news sources on Twitter... WSJ, The Economist, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Akron Beacon Journal, New York Times, BobcatAttack, Columbus Dispatch, The Post, Fox News, Athens News, Al Jazeera, Forbes, along with countless individual journalists reporting for a wide variety of news outlets... The list goes on and on...

While not everyone my age is like DelBobcat or myself, I think that the internet actually makes it EASIER for casual readers to pickup on random stories that interest them.
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/19/2016 3:13 AM
Mike--I hope that works. There must be some scale down due to budget restrictions. Or is it easier now that little budget will go for profit?


I understand the benefit of a diversity of media outlets. But long form journalism has taken a huge hit. If memory services, Sports Illustrated's splendid writing used to be exhibited in feature articles that were (espec at the back of the magazine) about twice as long as now. Can that type of thing be found anywhere today?

Daily newspapers (well, formerly first-rate ones like the L.A. Times) used to do articles that ran many pages. Now, if an article goes more than a page or so, it's a great rarity.

It's pleasing that 60 Minutes with its long-form 'take-outs' is still one of America's most-watched programs. Gives some hope.

There's something to be said for brevity, for succinctness. But long form exploration with its ability to explain and educate has a very definite place still.
mail
person
rpbobcat
1/19/2016 7:07 AM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
In my day, I'd pick up the post and read it at lunch. If students today are going to lunch and bringing it up on their phone, Tablet, etc. - why have a print version? Saves cost and delivers the product in the form the customer wants.
With the print version any student could just pick up a copy and read it.

Now students will have to make a conscious effort to read it.
That's got to result in less readership.

Personally, I find trying to read papers on a screen really tough on the eyes.
Guess I'm a dinosaur, but I really like going through a "real" newspaper every morning.
Define "conscious effort"

It takes me a couple taps of my finger to open up Twitter, click a link to a post article from one of their writers who I already follow and start reading. And I literally will open my phone and start clicking around without thinking anything of it... I think for students today, opening up their phone to look at the internet is pretty much subconscious much of the time.
T.O. I agree that, if you're interested,finding The Post on line isn't an issue.

What I was referring to is what I guess you'd call the "casual" reader.Instead a headline catching a student's attention,so that they pick up a copy of the paper,now a student will have to a make a conscious effort to read The Post and make that same effort every day.

Maybe I underestimate today's youth,but I think that going digital is going to reduce readership.
I think you do underestimate today's youth. I receive the Sunday Inquirer, but all of my other news comes in digital form. Just about every one of my peers consciously seek out news and most of them use social media to curate it. I follow the WSJ, NY Times, Wash Post, Philly Inquirer, Cincinnati Enquirer, Dispatch, The Post, Athens News, etc. on Twitter. On my 40 minute train ride every morning I thumb through my feed and its like getting every single one of those papers delivered to me. You can't beat the convenience of that, and more information is available to me than was ever possible just ten years ago. I think this is the trend among my generation and I view it as a positive.
Bingo.

I follow a huge diversity of news sources on Twitter... WSJ, The Economist, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Akron Beacon Journal, New York Times, BobcatAttack, Columbus Dispatch, The Post, Fox News, Athens News, Al Jazeera, Forbes, along with countless individual journalists reporting for a wide variety of news outlets... The list goes on and on...

While not everyone my age is like DelBobcat or myself, I think that the internet actually makes it EASIER for casual readers to pickup on random stories that interest them.
I agree that the internet makes it easier to follow a "random topic".
Maybe its me,but I would think that,by limting yourself only to stories for which you have a specific interest,you don't get the same broad exposure to information that you get "thumbing through" a newspaper or even seeing the headlines.

I also find that reading a digital newspaper,something I do when I go away,is really tough on my eyes and its hard not to miss some small "blurbs".
mail
person
SBH
1/19/2016 11:35 AM
My father was a newspaper writer/editor. In 1979 - 1979, mind you - he urged me not to pursue a career in print journalism because market forces were destroying the profession. I thought he was nuts. As always, parents look a lot smarter after you grow up.
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 68
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)