July 13, 2007
Media Critic Singles Out Chron For Most Likely To Go All-Electronic
When we talked to Phil Bronstein, the publisher of the San Francisco Chronicle, a few weeks back, he told us that "the Chronicle will continue to be packed with talented journalists who will keep providing what (SFist) Rita called 'an essential public service.'"
Recently, a media critic called into question the format in which the hard work of those journalists will be read.
Jon Fine, the media columnist for BusinessWeek magazine, is singling the Chron out as the major daily most likely to shutter the print side of its operation.
While we'd open our virtual arms to any San Francisco media venture seeking to join SFist as a Web-only proposition, we think The Chron doing so would certainly make a statement -- but a positive or negative one? Would going all-electronic be seen as a bold move, an attempt to stay ahead of the industry? Or would it be akin to the paper tucking a tail between its legs and running away?
According to Fine, it would require "big thinking--and spending enough to create networks of local sites and a giant local portal. And it will take a brave man or woman to pull the plug on the presses."
Was the approx. 5.5 years of losing $1 million per week motivation enough to pull the trigger on such a thing within Fine's theorized 18-24 month timeframe? We don't believe so. While Fine does raise a good point that fixed costs of printing, distribution, etc., will just keep climbing, we think this is clearly a case of a good writer trying to sex up his piece a just little bit. We're very skeptical of the sfgate becoming worth more than the print product in such a short timespan.
Also there are moral issues to consider (remember the "public service" angle, as Rita called it?). We know it's a business, but the news should not be limited to those of us with computers and high-speed Web access at home, let alone smartphones, iPhones, and other "e-readers."
Hard to prognosticate. But we'll say this: from what we gleaned from our readers a while back, the format of the news -- whether print or on-screen -- seems to have little to do with why or why not we're giving the Chron our money. Rather, it's all about content.
|
I DEPEND on the Sunday Chron. If it goes paperless, where the hell will I get my dog food and paper towel coupons?
Won't happen.
At least not for another 10 - 15 years.
Agree that the news should not be limited to just those with access to the web, but on the other hand paper is really expensive, and somebody has to pay for it.
I haven't purchased a paper in years.
If access is the issue, it would probably be cheaper to just skywrite the news.
"look it's a bird, it's a plane, it's.... Ed Jew!"
kidding, of course.
hey sf chron, here's a clue...print some real goddam news. youse seems to print a society column then call it a day.
why the fuck would I buy that? pfft.
good riddance, then.
The Chron might do well to scale back the print edition, and focus more energy on the Web site, but before it does that, the site needs to be completely revamped. Right now it's hard to navigate and poorly organized. Few people even know about the today's chronicle link, and therefore miss a lot of the days' stories.
When I read the print edition of any paper, I read far more stories because they are presented to you in a semi-friendly manner. The design of the paper is far from perfect, but the Web Site is so poor that I miss a lot of stories. Except, of course, when SFist links to them.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Cut the bulk of the wire stories, which would reduce paper cost, and fill in the rest of the pages with solid, local reporting. The Chron needs to stop charging for regurgitated information from the Times and the Post and the AP. Link to the wire stories on the web, not on paper, and they'll save money. That doesn't mean eliminating wire copy all together, it just means doing more of what should already be happening -- taking wire stories and localizing them with original reporting.
If the A section is reduced to six pages, so be it. At least it won't be a waste of paper.Aggressively advertise the Web site in the paper, like the Examiner is doing, and that's where you publish wire copy in its entirety.
Regarding this: "Or would it be akin to the paper tucking a tail between its legs and running away?"
Yes, it would, and it would show a complete lack of imagination when it comes to business models, and it would indeed short change the readers without access to computers, i.e., poor minorities.
Van, aka Nad
the only time i pick up a chron is when i'm waiting for my food to come at the pub, but even then i'd rather have an sfweekly or a sfbg because i don't want to deal with a third of the volume being stuffed with ads. totally worthless, IMHO. the only good thing about the chron is the "day in pictures" feature, which is online already.
the only time i pick up a chron is when i'm waiting for my food to come at the pub, but even then i'd rather have an sfweekly or a sfbg because i don't want to deal with a third of the volume being stuffed with ads. totally worthless, IMHO. the only good thing about the chron is the "day in pictures" feature, which is online already.