Revenue has declined at an average annual rate of 6.4% over the past 10 years.
The decline of newspapers — as a hard-copy delivery mechanism — wouldn’t be so bad. Ending the hard copies would SAVE millions of trees (a good thing). And, as we have already demonstrated, newspaper-retrieving dogs can be easily fooled by any roll of paper in a nice plastic sleeve. What’s terrible is the financial ruination of a substantial number of professional working journalists (an extraordinarily bad thing for all of us). It’s not like we’re getting too much reporting now and we’ll benefit with less.
But the future of newspaper publishing is bleak.
Top newspaper publishing executives can see this better than anyone, and so they’re doing the normal thing that top executives in troubled industries do — they’re looting their companies. You know, while they still can. Is there any other explanation for huge bonuses awarded — “awarded”!?! — to “successful” newspaper executives as they preside over dwindling revenues, staff cuts and a shrinking news product year after year? As the press reports on this, why isn’t it called “looting”?
Is there some better explanation for why Katharine Weymouth. the well-connected but sometimes ethically impaired publisher of The Washington Post should be in line for $15 million in bonuses — this in addition to her $1.9 million annual salary, as she downsizes the WaPo staff?
Is there a better way to understand how Mary Junck, CEO of Lee Enterprises which owns the Wisconsin State Journal, should receive a $500,000 bonus for presiding over near-bankruptcy and actual staff downsizing?
“As the press reports on this, why isn’t it called “looting”?