My comment on this lousy new story in this week’s The Economist:
Gentlemen,
Sorry but this is too much space for very little new information and few original ideas.
The crisis of many traditional mono-media (print publications and radio outlets: text or audio) and bi-media operations (television: audio+video) is that they offer very little unique and relevant content.
I read and I pay for The Economist because 90% of the time (sorry, not in this case) it adds value to the news.
It’s different, and it’s worth my money.
But 90% of what many newspapers, magazines, radio and television news operations produce is just recycled news garbage.
They are repackaging-news operations.
So, the Internet is better, faster and cheaper.
Regarding the “financial crisis” of many of the best U.S. newspaper companies (Tribune, NYT, etc.), let’s not forget that they are paying the consequences of very bad management, terrible M&As, and an irresponsible leadership that didn’t re-invest the huge profits of the recent past in their own core business.
Only the best will survive, yes, but at the same time only if they are able to re-invent themselves as “online-centric news organizations.”
That’s the real challenge.
Not the one from outside, but from inside.
What we need is more Innovation and change: more demos and less memos, more doing and less talking, more prototyping and less conceptualizing.
As always: too much analysis = paralysis.
Tags: M&A, Managment, Multi-Media, NYT, Newspapers, Online-Centric-News Organizations, THE ECONOMIST, Television, Tribune, innovation, internet, radio