Subscribe: Comments on: The future of newspapers? Asking the past:
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
ceo mcclatchy  company  day  future newspapers  future  jeff  mcclatchy  model  news  newspapers  past future  printed product  pruitt 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: The future of newspapers? Asking the past:

Comments on: The future of newspapers? Asking the past:

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Last Build Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2018 06:04:00 +0000


By: Mark Rutledge

Sat, 31 Mar 2007 13:10:18 +0000

Everyone here should go back and read Howard Weaver's post again. Newspapers are in the unique position to do anything anyone else in the news business can do, only better. That's a hell fo a business model, and don't think they're not aware of it. Let's not wear our blogger blinders too tightly.

By: George Kelly

Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:51:56 +0000

Mr. Giner: MediaNews, not McClatchy, now owns the San Jose Mercury News.

By: Juan Giner

Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:06:22 +0000

Jeff, The comments of Mr. Pruitt are a shame for a company that now owns two of the papers that were worldwide leaders in the online world. Nando and Mercurynews, in North Carolina and California were amazing operations when nobody, nobody, have done anything in this area. If the CEO of McClatchy is not aware of this great tradition, yes, the best thing to do is to sell any stock of this newspaper group of the past, not of the future.


Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:59:46 +0000

[...] Jeff Jarvis covers a recent breakfast in New York about the future of newspapers with Gary Pruitt, the CEO of McClatchy, and Dean Baquet, the former editor of Los Angeles Times, and now bureau chief of The New York Times in the Washington DC. [...]

By: Howard Weaver

Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:20:59 +0000

Guy (and Jeff, et al): Probably not much credibility from a person talking about his boss (I work for McClatchy) but please don't confuse Gary's observation about the viability of a "once-a-day" news briefing as descriptive of McClatchy's whole strategy. Everybody knows producing printed newspapers is no longer sufficent, but I wonder why you are so quick to dismiss the prospect that there is still a role for a product that 50 million audlts use every day and that still makes good money? Think of the once-a-day printed product (cheap, portable, durable, disposable) as one component of the news company's mix: a summary, briefing or orientation about recent past and near future events. In the meantime, hundreds of staffers are also furiously filling multiple other channels with breaking news, video reports, email alerts, blog posts and the like. The company's opinion journalists are convening community forums, hosting debates, gathering and presenting multiple community video commentaries. Maybe the company also partners with technology companies to enable faster and more efficent distribution, or to share in a super-efficent an ad sales model, or as an additional outlet for expensive, non-commodity news like reporting from Baghdad, Nairobi and Jerusalem. An efficently produced, carefully selected and packaged printed product might find a useful niche in that portfolio.

By: JoeC

Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:07:25 +0000

For a glimpse of a possible future for newspapers, check out Steve Garfield's postabout BostonNow.

By: Tansley

Thu, 29 Mar 2007 19:15:13 +0000

This is just so classic. People in an entrenched insitution seem to voluntarily put on blinkers and simply cease thinking along certain lines. Just because you ignore it, doesn't mean the tidal wave isn't going to wash away your village. I've heard some say that newspapers are dying a deserved death. This kind of brings it home, doesn't it?

By: Guy Love

Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:07:18 +0000

Seems the institutional players are still lingering in the denial stage and haven't quite made the jump to the acceptance stage of their situation. “People are looking for a once-a-day stop that is professionally selected and edited…. I think we would lose audience if we abandoned that.” Do these highly educated, highly professional, industry leaders ever break away from consoling one another long enough to actually understand why they have become the "buggy whip" of information?

By: laurence haughton

Thu, 29 Mar 2007 17:40:36 +0000

So Pruitt said "that he’s confident at their ability to build audiences but his concern is whether there is a business model that has advertising supporting journalism." Did anyone ask him to elaborate? If not, I think the lack of interest speaks volumes.