The inevitable end of printed media

New York Times Will Go Out of "Print" Sometime in the Future

Quote:

At a recent conference, The New York Times‘ publisher and chairman Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., stated that he eventually expects the “Gray Lady” will no longer be a physical newspaper.

“We will stop printing the New York Times sometime in the future, date TBD,” he said to attendees of the International Newsroom Summit.

This type of statement is sure to cause alarmist reactions in some and will strike others as a completely obvious conclusion to the ongoing struggles of traditional media.

As newspaper circulation continues to fall, so do newspaper revenues. All told, losses amount to 27.2% or ad revenue lost year-over-year between 2008 and 2009. More and more consumers are using the web to stay updated about current events; in fact, in a poll earlier this year, only 21.7% of Mashable readers said they got their news from a newspaper.

In other words, the traditional newspaper might be in trouble, but news as a commodity isn’t going anywhere

Sulzberger’s statement acknowledges this fact; we see it as a commitment to finding new, timely, culturally relevant ways to reach readers and profit from gathering and reporting the news.

Nevertheless, it’s taken most news outlets quite a bit of time to come around to the realization that print isn’t the be-all-end-all of journalism. By delaying innovation, many publications have put themselves in financially dire straits while scrambling to catch up with web-friendly revenue models.

This particular newspaper has flirted with various revenue models for online content over the past several years. Readers will be subject to a metered paywall beginning next year.

Sulzberger noted at the conference, “Our pursuit of the pay model is a step in the right direction for us. We believe that serious media organizations must start to collect additional revenue from their readers… information is less and less yearning to be free.”

NYTimes.com had previously toyed with another paywall-type mode, called TimesSelect, around three years ago. The change wasn’t as lucrative as the paper had expected; still, Sulzberger sees the experiment as educational, not necessarily a failure.

“If we discover that we’ve tried something that’s not working, we could change it,” he said.

What do you think of Sulzberger’s statement that the newspaper would cease to exist physically? Let us know in the comments.

Short version: NY Times has come out and said what every forward-thinking human has been thinking since the digital age began. Someday, the NY Times will no longer be a printed newspaper.

I think it's refreshing to hear them come out and embrace the digital age instead of rejecting it like the recording industry and to a lesser extent the film/TV industry. Personally, I hope the transition from physical to digital happens sooner rather than later. From a business perspective, they will save TONS of money on production and distribution, and will instead be able to focus on the content, which will remain identical to its physical counterpart.

As an avid Kindle user, I'm looking forward to the end of printed media, but I know a lot of people who are actively hoping it sticks around as long as possible. Which camp do you fall into?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I should add to my initial thoughts that I believe there will always be a place for SOME things to be printed, like coffee table books and anything in that realm. Literature, newspapers, textbooks, and media of that sort are just begging for the digital age and I imagine if they're ever offered in printed form in the future, it'll be a niche thing.

Personally, I've never had that connection to physical books and newspapers the way some do. I do a vast majority of my reading on the subway where typically I'm standing, holding a rail for balance. The ability to read a novel with crystal clear text on an e-ink screen that emits no light, weighs a few ounces, and gives me the ability to turn pages with a single button click is just perfect for my situation. The convenience factor is massive and I feel like as long as I have my Kindle I'll never read another physical novel again. Graphic novels will remain in their printed form until they come up with a better solution on Kindle or until I pick up an iPad, which is an astounding way to read them.

Russ, the Kindle does offer a search function that works very well. My favorite feature, though, is the ability to move the cursor over any word and get the definition of it in an instant.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by DieSeLFueLeD

If all books went digital, especially textbooks, students would go even further into debt

How do you figure? Textbook prices are outrageous, and I would have to imagine that ebook versions would be way cheaper. I envision a program where students are given Kindles/iPads with their tuition and then they have to just buy the textbooks they need to load it up with. If anything, having an e-reader might prompt students to buy more suggested texts instead of just the required ones, since they won't break their back lugging them around and they'll probably end up being a much smaller monetary investment.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by DieSeLFueLeD

I know these are just ::words:: and it might be beyond some people (you, and possibly Sprout) to enjoy craftsmanship, but a book is more than just words on a page.

It's not beyond me, I just personally don't benefit from it or need it to enjoy a novel. Like I said, I do a vast majority of my reading on the subway. Physical books are a pain in the ass compared to my Kindle, especially a hardcover. I mean yes, I know books are not INHERENTLY a pain in the ass, but compared to the Kindle it's night and day reading on the subway.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?