On Jun 4, 2013, at 9:12 PM, Walt <ldott...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/4/2013 7:35 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >> I didn't say that falling subscription rates have anything to do with >> grammar. I was merely responding to Peter's critique of newspaper writing. >> In fact, Times subscriptions are up 17.6% over a year ago, due primarily to >> a substantial increase in digital subscribers. Overall, the industry is >> flat. Profit margins are down due primarily to a loss of advertising >> revenue. That's the main reason for the cutbacks in photo expenditures. >> > Fair enough. > > My point is that the staffing cuts at the Sun-Times are a consequence of > falling ad revenues, which are in turn a consequence of falling (or at least > persistently stagnant) subscription rates and declining newsstand sales. And > I have a hard time buying the notion that farming out the work once done by > experienced photographers to a phalanx of Instagram ingenues is going to > address the underlying issue.
You would have a point if they were currently relying on experienced photographers, but for years most newspapers have turned to low-buck freelancers and penny stock. At least the reporters will be connected to their stories. They're hardly "instagram ingenues." > The newspaper industry at large seems wedded to the proposition that the > problem rests solely in "the model" rather than in the product itself. I > think that's a steaming pile. Photos aren't the be-all and end-all of > newspaper sales, to be sure, but they certainly help. And there would seem to > be some value in having exclusive access to powerful images generated > in-house rather than sending out some schlub with an iPhone to get a > reasonably serviceable exposure or pulling something off the wires. I'm a writer who shoots his own photos much of the time. Does that make me a "schlub?" Or does that only apply to those other writers? Newspaper circulation is flat in many venues and increasing in others. Ad revenue is down in part because the supposed marketing experts have convince many advertisers that social media will be their salvation, and in part because of the recession. What's "the model" on which the industry is supposedly placing the blame? Your analysis doesn't make sense. Paul > > -- Walt > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
