Results matching “group offers new onli”

The Printcasting model is on its way to "democratise" print publishing in more cities in the US, it was announced last week. The initiative, financed by the winnings of the 2008 Knight News Challenge, has made its first newspaper partnership with Denver-based MediaNews Group. The publishing group controls 54 daily newspapers in 11 states, including The Denver Post and San Jose Mercury News.

The project originated out of the newspaper, the Bakersfield Californian and first went public in March to cater for the town of Bakersfield, California.

There is a crisis in trust and communication between the British public and the mainstream media, a new report has concluded. The gulf between public expectations of news provision and the actual nature of articles, which oscillate between esoteric or irresponsible, leaves readers feeling confused and excluded.

The report, entitled 'Public Trust In The News' was conducted by researchers from Manchester and Leeds Universities and was published by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. It investigated the dynamics of news production and consumption, to ascertain if there is a difference in what "the public expects from news media and what journalists mean by serving the public".  The paper highlights the underlying causes of an apparent widespread disenchantment with the media and the detrimental effects this is having on the standards of reporting and civil participation in democracy. Thankfully, the report offers several propositions for a new journalistic direction, which could refresh the reader-writer compact.

It is becoming increasingly clear that a proportion of general news content is going to be put behind some kind of a pay wall in upcoming months. Several publishers have expressed their intentions to start charging, and several third parties want to help them do it. Journalists don't seem to want it, it seems pretty unlikely that readers would want it, so how are publishers going to succeed? Can it restore value to good journalism which is increasingly becoming a commodity? The Editors Weblog takes a look at some of the different services on offer and strategies being considered.

Journalism Online

First, Journalism Online, a start-up founded in April by industry experts Steve Brill, Gordon Crovitz and Leo Hindery, has taken facilitating charging for online content as one of its core goals. Brill made a presentation at the NAA-organised newspaper executives' meeting in Chicago on May 28 at which Journalism Online's mission was stated as enabling "news organizations to restore the optimal mix of circulation and advertising revenue necessary to finance original reporting and editing" hence giving them the chance to "realize the revenue they deserve--and can command--from readers and distributors for their digital content."

Journalism Online is marketing its proposal as an e-commerce platform. The idea is that it would make premium content from multiple publishers easily accessible to readers and allow annual, monthly subscriptions, day passes or single articles. There will also be all-you-can-read bundling options. Publishers will decide what content they want to charge for, how much to charge (though it is unclear how all-you-can-read prices will be decided) and how to charge. In the presentation, Brill suggests $50-60 a year and $5-6 a month for small to large city papers, but he stressed that this was an arbitrary choice and clearly the price would depend on how much content the publisher put behind the pay wall. He had previously suggested $15 a month for an all-you-can-read subscription.

The company maintains that implementing its system will not lead to a substantial loss in traffic or ad revenue, claiming that papers would be able to keep 88% of page views and 91% of ad revenue, as any paid content would be part of a hybrid model. In his examples, Brill demonstrates how he believes a paper could essentially double its income. Brill has also stressed that Journalism Online will incorporate lots of sampling. He told Nieman Lab's Zachery Seward that Journalism Online's assumptions are that 5-10% of current monthly unique visitors will be willing to pay for content; that 95 percent of those paying customers will choose subscriptions over micropayments; and that after subscribing, those readers will view 30-40 percent more pages than non-paying readers.

Overall, the company seems to be presenting its service as a chance for newspapers to focus on their best customers, offering a premium service to those who are prepared to pay. At the Chicago meeting, Journalism Online also emphasised the advantages of paid online content in terms of preserving the print product: it is "about the value proposition of print... about print subscriber acquisition and retention costs."

ViewPass

Another third party service was presented at the NAA-organised meeting in Chicago: ViewPass. It is the brainchild of Alan Mutter and Ridgely Evers, and could be implemented in 9 months at a cost of $6 million. The idea is that newspaper readers would be required to register once with ViewPass and it would then track their activity across participating websites.

Like Journalism Online, it would aim to offer readers the chance to purchase premium online content from multiple sources, with potential for subscriptions, micropayments and bundling. Essentially, the ways in which it differs is that ViewPass would be industry-owned, giving publishers the chance to (hopefully) share profits in the business itself, and it most crucially it would allow users to 'pay' for their content with their time or their information instead of with cash, because of their increased value to advertisers. In fact, ViewPass would focus on presenting readers that were attractive to advertisers for highly targeted ads. Mutter himself is not enthusiastic about charging for much online content, suggesting to Nieman Lab that it would only work for specialist content.

Circlabs

The creation of another start up was announced the day before the Chicago meeting: CircLabs, founded by Bill Densmore, Jeffrey Vander Clute, Martin Langeveld and Joe Bergeron. Its first product, code-named Circulate, aims to "offer a solution" to publishers who are experimenting with micropayments and subscriptions, suggesting that they should charge for content which is "both scarce in nature and of high utility to a segment of the audience." CircLabs is also focussed on developing opportunities for "high-value" advertising revenue, and plans to incorporate personalised news services. Further details are yet to appear.

Efforts of individual publishers

News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch has announced that all the company's newspapers would be charging within a year. It is looking at bundling content, according to chief digital officer Jonathan Miller, such as putting all the media conglomerate's New York-based content into one subscription package. One of the company's prime assets, the Wall Street Journal, is proof that paid premium content does work, although of a specifically financial nature. The paper is to expand its paid online options, with plans to introduce micropayments later this year along with a further level of premium subscriptions. Murdoch suggested that the company wants to "test" a pay model on some of its stronger properties first, and there has been speculation that the Sunday Times will be among these. The paid online content debate, although definitely present in the UK, has not been as strong as across the Atlantic, and it would be interesting to see what sort of reaction such a move would provoke.

MediaNews Group is planning to charge online under the belief that "we continue to do an injustice to our print subscribers and create perceptions that our content has no value by putting all of our print content online for free." A memo to staff from CEO Dean Singleton and president Jody Lodovic suggested that a part-paid strategy is in the works, and made it clear that the company is intending to charge for existing content rather than for new products or services.

The New York Times is apparently looking at two different ways in which it could charge for online content. The first would be somewhat similar to the Financial Times' model, whereby readers could surf the site without charge until a page-view or word limit were reached, when a 'metre' would start running and it would charge a user for the rest of their time spent. (The FT allows 10 free articles per user per month, then demands a subscription.) This would have the advantage of not putting specific content behind a paywall, and therefore not angering journalists.

The other option is a 'membership' scheme: readers would donate money and subsequently be invited into a "New York Times community," which would offer them free merchandise and other benefits. Possibly a tiered membership scheme could be implemented. When these proposals were discussed, Bill Keller told staff that a decision would be made by the end of June. The NYT is wary following its failed TimesSelect experience back in 2007 and seems determined to find a solution that will not damage its significant ad revenue.

Potential obstacles: search and antitrust

Currently many people find their news through search engines such as Google, and for articles to get good Google rankings and appear higher up in search results, they cannot be behind a paywall. Newspapers must strive to find an appropriate solution to this when they start charging: the Wall Street Journal's tactic of allowing its paid content to be accessed free via Google is clearly not fair to its paying customers, and is a definite deterrent to potential subscribers.

Antitrust regulations in the US effectively prevent publishers from coming to a joint agreement on when and how they should start charging for content. At the newspaper executives' meeting in Chicago on May 28, an antitrust lawyer was present to make sure all the discussion was legal. Poynter analyst Rick Edmonds suggested that the use of a third party "vendor" such as Journalism Online could be the solution to these concerns. Journalism Online has taken on David Boies and Ted Olson for antitrust advice.

So, is it going to work? And how?

Undoubtedly, implementing paid content is going to be a considerable challenge and is likely to involve substantial experimentation. Newspapers need to consider what exactly they would want to charge for, for example whether they could create a new paid service or put what is currently free behind a pay wall. It seems as if it would be easier to persuade people to pay for something new, rather than telling them they have to start paying for something previously free. But then people might decide that they are happy with what they get now and that they do not want to pay for anything extra. A paper with a highly developed website such as the New York Times could possibly offer basic news free but keep its interactive graphics and other more innovative content for its premium customers.

As yet, Journalism Online seems to be ahead of the pack with regards to third party services. No papers have publicly signed on but Brill told Seward that he had already spoken to about half of those at the Chicago meeting. In terms of connections and credibility of its founders, Journalism Online has a head start. ViewPass and CircLabs do seem to be onto something, however, with their focus on offering consumers as targets for higher-revenue advertising and effectively allowing them to pay for their news by looking at ads. Could these companies coexist, or is there only room for one?

A crucial factor which should not be underestimated in any attempt to charge online is ease of use for the consumer. People will be far more likely to part with their cash if doing so is simple and straightforward. For this reason, sign-in-once and all-you-can-read offers are likely to appeal. And once people are paying, the level of service should reflect this: good journalism presented attractively and accessibly. An element of personalisation would also seem worth paying for.

Can paid online content 'save' newspapers? If Journalism Online's figures are correct, it looks like it could make a significant difference to a newspaper's fortunes. The next few months will be telling in terms of experimentation and competition between proposals, but it will take some years for the definitive answer to this question to be realised.

Last week's "secret" meeting between newspaper publishers in Chicago has prompted much discussion and commentary about the implications of such a meeting, particularly in terms of antitrust laws. According to the AP, the meeting's agenda was titled "Models to lawfully monetize content," and an antitrust lawyer was present, said the Newspaper Association of America, which organised the meeting.

In his article, "How the Obama administration can save newspapers," Los Angeles Times writer Tim Rutten argues that the way to save US newspapers is to make it easier for them to charge for online content.  It seems clear that charging for general news content would have a far greater chance of succeeding if all newspapers were to start to do this simultaneously. The same goes for licensing their content to search engines: it will only be possible if it is an industry wide effort. And such moves are currently illegal, as Rutten points out, under laws barring collusion and price-fixing.

A new report produced by the publishing arm of PricewaterhouseCoopers - the world's largest professional services company - in conjunction with the World Association of Newspapers (WAN), examines the outlook for newspapers as they seek to realign themselves within a digital framework and minimise the impact of the global recession.

The study identifies interactivity, specialisation and new business models as being key to ensuring the survival of the newspaper in an online age.

A large proportion of the discussion and innovation with regards to monetise newspapers' online content has come out of the United States, possibly unsurprisingly considering the intensity of the economic downturn there, and arguably the American entrepreneurial spirit. But the US is not alone in its contemplation of the issue, which could potentially 'save' newspapers, and the Editors Weblog took a look at the situation in France and the ideas that are emerging, based on two recent studies.

Masters student Matthieu de Vivie carried out a major research project entitled "Can online news be profitable?" in which he analysed the sectors' sources of income, along with debates that have taken place on French media blogs over the past few months. The Institute of Audio-visuals and Telecommunications in Europe (IDATE), a market analysis and consulting firm, has produced several reports on online strategies for the press.

The French situation

In France, printing and distribution costs are high, partly due to state regulation and to a very powerful printing union, meaning that print profits tend to be lower. However, papers do benefit from much public aid, and this was increased in January when president Nicolas Sarkozy offered the press a 600million euro bailout. Many media outlets are owned by groups which do not actually specialise in media, but are looking for "prestige and influence within it," according to de Vivie. He gives financial daily Les Echos as an example, which is owned by Bernard Arnault, LVMH. Groups such as Dassault which owns national daily Le Figaro, or Lagardere which owns the magazine Paris Match, Journal du Dimanche and part of Le Monde, have leaders who are friends with Sarkozy. Many journalists have protested at what they see as threats to the independence of their papers.

Related to this issue of possible government influence, the French press is suffering from a lack of reader confidence, similar to that in the US. A 2008 survey showed that 46% of people did not believe a large part of what they read in newspapers. The Internet has "done away with journalists' monopoly over the production of information," states de Vivie. The increased presence of other fonts of information and aggregators has encouraged people to look far and wide for news, as in other countries.

De Vivie concluded that today, it would be impossible for a major French newspaper to survive online-only, due to the abundance of information available online and weak advertising revenue. IDATE's reports also suggest that traditional advertising is not going to support a newspaper on its own. So what are the options for newspapers as their readers migrate online?

Charging readers

The most basic option is to charge readers for online content, as newspapers have done in print for many decades. IDATE believes that the pay wall model is extremely limited. However, leading newspaper Le Monde seems to have successfully adopted a part-paid, part-free model online. It is a rare feat for a general interest paper, at least compared to the English-speaking world, where only financial giants such as the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal seem to have accomplished this. Articles are free for three days after publication, after which they go behind a pay wall. They can then be purchased individually, or basic and premium subscriptions are available, the premium option including access to digital copies of the print paper. Subscriptions represented about 35% of LeMonde.fr's revenue, while advertising accounts for 65%, according to figures obtained by de Vivie in November 2008. LeMonde.fr still has high readership, suggesting that the site's traffic has not been damaged too much by the pay wall, and that the model makes sense.

De Vivie also looks at French site Mediapart, a participatory, paid venture without advertising, launched in 2008 but Edwy Plenel, a former Le Monde editor. It is free to read other citizen participation, but a subscription gives users the right to write articles or leave comments, and to read articles from the Mediapart team. The site, however had not captured its target number of subscribers in 2008.

Alternatives to advertising?

But if papers do not succeed in persuading users to pay for their news: what are the other options? In terms of advertising, the Internet has allowed new measures to develop, as well as the CPM, pay-per-click and pay-per-action rates offer a more accurate assessment of an advertisement's effectiveness. It also allows for targeted advertising, however this is not much used in France. CPMs are also considerably lower in France than in the UK or US: according to de Vivie, a CPM of $10 is considered good in France, compared to $30 elsewhere. Part of this is due to lower investment in advertising, as well as lower Internet penetration.

IDATE's report on the future of the press considers below-the-line advertising as "essential" for a newspaper's online advertising strategy, and also recommends e-commerce as a distinct possibility: "the media now have the opportunity of developing into veritable media stores by incorporating e-commerce offers into their editorial content. IDATE suggests that newspapers form alliances with book sellers to market the books that they review, or with ticket sellers to market plays or other events. Another option is to get involved with products that target a newspapers' readership, such as the Wall Street Journal's partnership with Wine.com. The Lagardere group has signed an agreement with Sumitomo, a Japanese leader in online commerce. The firm sees advertising and e-commerce as the main revenue streams from mobile news, rather than making users or telecoms operators pay for content.

De Vivie also believes that for larger media groups, diversifying online can be profitable. He cites the example of the Washington Post's ownership of profitable education service Kaplan Inc. which he feels "is allowing the Washington Post to survive." The French Le Figaro group includes numerous commercial websites such as Evene, Sport24, Cadremploi, BazarChic ou TickeTac, which represent "an important source of revenue." LeFigaro.fr is not currently profitable but it has an important audience. One of the problems with such a strategy, however, is that it risks diluting the brand's value, which is already a fear of many papers as reading habits change online.

Potential of online-only

De Vivie is does see some potential in online-only sites, but only in certain conditions. Firstly, he believes that small "supple" organisations which offer content with significant added value, focussed on specific niches and gathering a large community, are a good approach. "This equilibrium is nonetheless precarious," he added, particularly in France where advertising brings in less revenue than in the US and it is often necessary to develop alternative sources of income.

One French success story is Rue89, which combines the skills of journalists with the knowledge of experts and the participation of citizens. Amateur contributions are checked and edited by the site's reporters. De Vivie explains that the site quickly acquired "strong journalistic credibility," offering exclusive stories and investigations. He estimates that the site could quite feasibly become profitable, especially as Rue89 does not make all of its income from advertising, but also develops websites for others, which makes up an estimated one third of its revenue. He believes that other online players also have potential to break even, due to their low fixed costs and overheads.

The impression that emerges from the studies is that online news has great potential and possibilities continue to evolve. It is therefore advisable that newspapers continue to innovate and do not resign themselves to relying on print income for as long as possible.  

The announcement last Friday that Sir Anthony O'Reilly will step down as CEO of Independent News & Media provoked two things: firstly, it sent the company's shares soaring,  then sparked a revived debate regarding its future.

When O'Reilly turns 73 in May, he will be replaced by his son and current chief operating officer, Gavin O'Reilly, who is also president of the World Association of Newspapers. The restructure of the INM will also affect the Board, which will be reduced from 17 members as it presently is, to just 10. According to son Gavin, his father's decision to leave had nothing to do with the impending 200 million euro bond repayment deadline, also in May.

Having learnt their lesson from Election Day, US newspapers are determined not to let the potential profit-making madness that is Barack Obama's Inauguration Day slip through their fingers.  The astronomical and unexpected demand for Election Day copies from readers who wanted both information and souvenirs of the historic result left newspapers reeling and print presses smoking.

So on January 20th, nothing will be left to chance.  The Washington Post is so far the publication with the grandest plans; they intend to have an extra afternoon edition on the stands by 2.30pm and are adding a 4-page wraparound special to their usual 6pm edition. Both will be sold at a mark-up, $2 compared to the usual Post price of 75c.  They also plan to have more than 70 journalists in Washington, greatly increased press runs and will employ 500 street 'hawkers' to sell their paper throughout the city.  The Post will release a commemorative edition on the 21st January, which is also selling at $2 per copy - although advance orders are being taken for $9.95.

Obama's hometown paper The Chicago Tribune is cashing in on his success with plans for an afternoon edition, and a promise to keep the presses rolling until demand is satisfied. The New York Times is set to increase its press run by 950,000 after the big day and has revealed plans for an Inauguration themed magazine two days before, as has the Washington Post.  USA Today has decided to release its own two Inauguration magazines, on 20th and 21st January, which will retail at $4.95.

Inauguration is proving to be a great day for citizen journalism too with many, often smaller, publications actively asking for their readers' input. The Journal of Martinsburg, West Virginia for example 'would like to invite all Journal readers to become citizen journalists and help share in the coverage of this historic day.' They are offering readers the chance to post their own photos and stories of the day on a specially dedicated section of their 'Virtual Newsroom'.  The Atlanta Journal-Constitution is also encouraging their readers to document the day, whether they have tickets or not.

It's not just the newspapers that are determined to make the most of Inauguration Day either.  There are many temporary and slightly out of the ordinary alliances forming - MSNBC coverage of the event will be streamed in 650 Starbucks stores across the country, for example.  Fox News are broadcasting in Times Square for the day, MSNBC will be shown in many theatres and cinemas, and CNN have given permission for their day's footage to be used by a variety of groups (including public school systems).  The AP is planning its 'most comprehensive multiplatform reporting ever' for 20 January, following an increased trend towards multimedia reporting.

The big event offers a timely boost in sales for the struggling media industry, which has been battling the increase of news on the web and the resulting lack of desire for newspapers for some time.  With all the extra copies, special editions, exclusive screenings and increased prices, it seems that demand for news on Inauguration Day is set to exceed all previous events - or so newspaper bosses hope.

Source: Editor & Publisher,  Followthemedia.com, New York Times, Poynter Online

To mark the relaunch of the Editors Weblog, the World Editors Forum is running a special series entitled "Doing More with Less." The series highlights major trends that editors-in-chief are using to steer their newsrooms through the difficult economic climate. The second of the series studies newsroom integration at the Finnish business weekday paper, Kauppalehti, which, unable to move into a new building like the Guardian, is working with the limitations of its current office space.

In a country where newspaper penetration ranks third in the world, and where newspapers' share of mass media turnover remains high (31 per cent), Finland's leading weekday business paper Kauppalehti can have confidence in its print product's continued success. Its outlook became even more positive at the end of 2007 when its competitor Taloussanomat ceased print production and went online only. Kauppalehti, owned by the Alma Media Group also offers extensive online services at Kauppalehti.fi, including both free and paid content, and the company broadcasts economic television news on MTV3, the most popular single channel in Finland.

Integration at Kauppalehti is key to keeping a competitive edge in the fast-paced world of business news. Although the paper has integrated substantially, barriers remain, primarily because of the physical layout of the newsroom and limited space. The Editors Weblog spoke to editors-in-chief Hannu Leinonen and Eero Tuomisto and financial news editor Janne Poysti about how far integration has come and how successful it has been.

Kauppalehti first created a joint news desk when it moved offices in 2002. News editors from all platforms now sit together, on a long "super desk" in the newsroom, close to the TV studio. However, the architecture of the building has prevented the creation of one large multimedia centre: the main newsroom is L-shaped and there is not a lot of open space, with "mainly-print" journalists sitting on a different floor. Janne Poysti pointed out that there are greater communication problems between editors and reporters for print services than for online or television.  Eero Tuomisto remarked "I think this sort of integrated newsroom should be round, a big round building with the news desk in the middle, but unfortunately we don't have that." He hopes to move towards this ideal in the future, and explained that Alma Media is considering relocating all its operations into one building within the next few years.

The architecture of Kauppalehti's building has prevented the creation of one large multimedia centre

WHAT IT MEANS IN PRACTICE

The space issue aside, operations have been integrated and streamlined to a significant degree.  A key element is the two joint meetings per day, attended by all news editors and editors-in-chief, to decide which news items will be on which channels and in what order. "In that sense the decision making is very centralised," commented Hannu Leinonen.  The fact that the editors all sit together, "within yelling distance", has been crucial for the success of integration, he explained. Janne Poysti remarked that "journalists work quite closely in Kauppalehti", with television reporters sending their reports to online and print, and vice versa.

Staff have been taught to be flexible, and many people can move between different medias. Leinonen explained that "by rotating people within the organisation we have been able to enhance people's skills so that more people can do multimedia now than five years ago." Tuomisto stressed the importance of good internal marketing, "how you sell the idea to your employees." There was some resistance to changes, but Poysti was confident that "nowadays, everything is going pretty smoothly." Some reporters will write a piece for television and follow it with a longer, more in depth article for the next day's paper.

A crucial part of the integration philosophy at Kauppalehti, however, is that not everybody has to be multi-channel. Tuomisto clarified that "our experience is that every single journalist has to have a home base and be attached to some channel." Editors are also still allocated to a specific platform as "you can't be responsible for everything," Tuomisto explained.

Leinonen explained that "by rotating people within the organisation we have been able to enhance people's skills so that more people can do multimedia now than five years ago."

The markets team, however, is one area of the newsroom that is fully integrated. The group sit by the main news desk and produce a breaking news feed that is sold, as the services of a news agency might be, and they then supplement this with print and television commentaries.

There is also considerable cooperation between teams in terms of content gathering. Tuomisto explained that it was a waste of resources for three or four Kauppalehti journalists to interview the same source, so now they try to coordinate who does what. Often it will be the television crew who carries out the interview, as is the case when Nokia releases its quarterly results, for example, and then the text reporters can use the resulting audio.

NEXT STEP: IMPROVING COMBINED IMPACT

Both editors-in-chief seemed keen to integrate further, but stressed that a fully integrated newsroom would have to wait for a move to new premises. For outlets which cannot afford to make the move to a state of the art multimedia newsroom like those of The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, or Fairfax, integration will always be a more difficult process.

Meanwhile, Kauppalehti is working to improve its publications and their combined impact.  Integration provides ample opportunity to reduce duplication in the final product. "We are redesigning the newspaper so that we don't publish the news that is already on the website," Leinonen explained. The redesigned product is being released this month.  Additional aims are to stop providing newspaper content free on the Web site, and to develop paid online content.  Tuomisto described the way that the organisation is working to create subscription packages that consist of news and some "added value" in the form of specialist knowledge.

Consulting firm Deloitte has released a report showing that the 14-25 demographic watches a considerable amount less television than its older peers. Whereas Generation X (26-42) watches 19.2 hours of TV per week, the Millennial generation average a mere 10.5 hours in front of the boob tube. Still, this generation consumes the most media of any other demographic. Surprising figures? Not really.

With all of the interactive options Millennials have (video games, social media, mobile phones, MP3 players, etc.), sitting in front of a screen controlled by traditional "gatekeepers" seems less appealing. Getting their fingers dirty on newsprint that doesn't give the chance to talk back, even more so. Obviously, the trend of already declining newspaper circulations will only perpetuate as Millennials grow older and their grandparents pass-on.

But all is not negative for traditional media, whose audiences have never been bigger thanks to their Internet presence. The Bivings Group recently released a report indiciating that the large majority of newspapers are "getting it" on the Web, integrating social media and RSS, eliminating registration pages and opening their articles to reader comments.

An even brighter light shines on these promising developments when considering Internet ad spend. UK based-bank Barclay's released its US ad forecasts this week, expecting a 6.1% increase in Internet advertising. Although this rate is a huge drop from the 20-30% increases Internet advertising has been experiencing for several years, the global economic crisis combined with the fact that TV and newspaper advertising will drop 10% and 17% respectively means Internet-based companies can remain optimistic that ad revenues will continue to fill their coffers.

Of course, even increasing Internet revenues are not coming close to making up for lost ad revenues of media companies through traditional outlets. Content production and journalism in general are suffering because of massive staff layoffs. And perhaps to make things worse, Barclay's predicts that the bulk of Internet ad jump in 2009 will go to search, up 20%, compared with a 4% rise in display advertising. Some traditional media companies may not like it, but they're going to have to share more revenues with Google and the like. Still, that's not all bad. As they leave the paper on the doorstep and the TV off, most Millennials only find traditional media through Google to begin with, which may mean search engines are the only way traditional media houses will remain relevant. 

Sources: Reuters through European Journalism Centre, Seeking Alpha, Read Write Web  

Financial services comparison site BeatThatQuote.com will team up with 132 of Newsquest Media Group's network of local newspaper websites.

BeatThatQuote.com offers money and insurance comparison services across loans, mortgages, credit cards, banking, insurance, investments, pensions and annuities, according to Brand Republic.

Paul Bradshaw of The Online Journalism Blog (OJB) and creator of the “news diamond,” which rethinks the editorial newsroom process in terms of speed and depth, has now come up with what a 21st century newsroom does after a story is published.

For many major dailies, the current trend of newsroom integration seems like a natural evolution nowadays. The Editors Weblog has regularly showcased best examples of newsroom integration and has advocated that papers follow the trend. Yet many, if not most, newspapers continue to function well while keeping a non-integrated organization. So the question is: do papers have to integrate? In this first piece of a three part-series investigating non-integrated newsrooms, the Figaro.fr managers explain to the Weblog how online fits in the group’s strategy.

A few weeks ago, USA Today announced the launch of widgets. The Washington Post launched its first widgets only two months ago. Both newspapers, which tend to be at the edge of multimedia innovation, plan on rolling out more widgets in the weeks to come. For those who haven’t caught on to the craze, washingtonpost.com’s Executive Editor, Jim Brady, and USA Today’s Executive Producer, Joel Sucherman, describe their use and advantages for newspapers.

At the beginning of March, USA Today, US’ largest newspaper, launched its redesigned website with much emphasis on reader interactivity, user-generated content, and providing social networking tools such as reader and reporter profiles. Executive editor Kinsey Wilson, who has led USAToday.com’s development, explains how the online edition is embracing social trends while sticking to the paper’s journalistic heritage.

Representatives of Europe’s top business papers gathered on April 16 and 17 in Paris for one of their tri-annual meetings at which they discuss the latest innovations and the future of their industry. It has been about a year now, commented one editor, that the presentations at the seminar have focused on nothing but digital concerns. The Paris meeting was no different.

TimesOnline, the website for the Times of London and the Sunday Times, recently underwent a comprehensive redesign at the hands of Sapient, a marketing services company. The site now uses strong editorial and page layout to give every page a front-page feel.

In five years, Metro, 20 Minutes, and the other free papers that followed have transformed French media and their audience. This is a recap on freesheets’ path, and how paid-for papers are still seeking countermeasures.

A new study released by BURST! media has revealed that Americans 55 and older now spend more time consulting online media sources and less time on offline ones. This shows that offline media is facing ever increasing competition for its most faithful demographic.