It’s a headline that is likely to be written by many news organizations globally: Digital up, print down.
Nothing new about this. And, indeed, as I read Rick Edmonds’ piece titled The New York Times announces newsroom strategy review as print declines continue, I was thinking that there is nothing surprising here. Then I concluded that this is perhaps the type of news that most publishers would be happy to report. The Times latest financial result yields the following:
—digital-only subscriptions grew 53,000 year-to-year, roughly 5 percent
—expectation to add another 50,000 digital subs in the current quarter and grow the base to 1,250,000 by the end of the year.
—an 11 percent increase in digital advertising
That is for the good news, a reaffirmation that the Times long term digital strategy is paying off rather well. It is growth all round.
What is not surprising, however, is that during the same period:
—print circulation was down 6.9 percent daily and 4.4 percent Sunday (an indication of what we have been saying, weekend print products are likely to remain as the sole print publication)
– print advertising revenues were down 7 percent (and it is not likely that we will see a reversal here).
All of this brings The New York Times to announce a comprehensive review of its newsroom strategy as it continues its journey towards a more digital product. IT is similar to what is going on at The Washington Post and dozens of other major newspapers around the globe. I get a sense that 2016 marks the year when publishers have done more than talk digital philosophy. There is real transformation.
So, in the end, the financial report from The New York Times is good news. IT signals action for a successful digitally driven operation. It may also augur well for how print is treated, away from the panic of a few years ago, and more about the realization that there is a place for print, after all, as part of a media quintet (or sextet), but not as the main event.
We will watch what the Times and the Post do with great interest.
Pages we like
This was a different way of telling the story of the Super Bowl, in the Sunday, Feb. 7, edition of The New York Times. IT is purely type with some minor illustrations. The narrative flows well.