Are you under 25? When is the last time you bought a newspaper?

Posted by | Filed under From Greg's Desk, Written Content | Oct 28, 2009 | Tags: magazines, newspapers, photojournalism, SCAD, web | 13 Comments

I like to take an informal survey in Business Practices for Photography Class at Savannah College of Art and Design.

Share and Enjoy

13 Responses to “Are you under 25? When is the last time you bought a newspaper?”

Brian Confer says:

October 23, 2009 at 8:24 am

Great post, Greg. Very insightful comparison about writers/musicians. The next question is, “How much will they charge when they get a freelance assignment?” I hope it’s more than they’re paying for content. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case in my Northern Michigan market.
Evan Saunders says:

October 23, 2009 at 1:52 pm

good points here, I never buy the Times because I find it horribly Liberal…but I never thought of the fact that the lack of readership is hurting the photo industry. Similar situation I’ve experienced was hearing that Gourmet magazine would no longer be published. No one was buying the magazine since they could get the recipes online. This rocked the food photo world, seeing another client bite the dust. So maybe I’ll have to pick up the Times every now and then, at least I could use it to wash my windows with or something haha.
Chris New says:

October 23, 2009 at 1:53 pm

Having no interest in being a photojournalist myself, I’m not sure how useful my comments are, but I do see the problem.
However, your analogy with the young writers and young musicians is not quite correct; there is no free equivalent for their medium in regard to online content. For the most part you still must pay for a book to read in any form (e-Book or hard copy) and it is still illegal to download music off the internet.
You could argue that libraries exist, so these hypothetical young writers could go and read novels for free, but at some point they’d have to return the books so that’s not the same as free online content.
So now this begs the question: Would young writers and musicians pay for their medium’s content if it were readily available for free? I think you’d find the answer to be a resounding “NOPE!”

I may be assuming a lot about writing and music students (but so are you, I guess), but I have to play Devil’s Advocate whenever I get the chance.

So now everyone is on a level playing field and we can get back to the original question at hand. I, too, am guilty of not paying for content. In my current financial situation as a student I am always going to take the free option when it’s available. However, if internet news sites were to take a microtransactions approach to their services, I wouldn’t be opposed to paying a penny (or more) a day to get my news and media. But I’m not entirely sure that’s the best way to go about it. I don’t really have any other solutions or suggestions but I feel like media is going to move more toward being entirely paid for by ad-revenue, especially when it goes all-digital and there are no more paper or ink or distribution costs involved. I think one reason people are adverse to paying to view content on a website is that they are already paying $20-$100 a month for the internet service alone. So that’s like having to rent a pair of eyes so you can see and then having to pay for a book to read on top of that.

It’s frustrating and very difficult to make any calls on this at the moment since our industry (and most others) are still in such a state of flux and no one quite knows what the internet is capable of now and what it could be capable of in the future. Everything is having to be reinvented and it’s pretty scary to be learning a trade when even the people who were/are established in your field don’t even fully understand what’s going on and what’s going to happen.
Ian Aleksander Adams says:

October 23, 2009 at 9:43 pm

paying for content is so over

I’m not even really joking – as costs to replicate approach zero, profit will always only be a sliver, only supporting those who control the structure in place to distribute, not the actual creators.

New structures will emerge.
Kyle Tunney says:

October 29, 2009 at 6:39 am

Really good read and insight Greg, thanks for posting!!!

Kyle
Tom Cooper says:

October 29, 2009 at 3:29 pm

When i lived in the UK (long before computers and the internet) I usually bought two or more papers a day. Some of the most inspiring photographs were to be seen and I looked forward to seeing them. Now I am in the States in GA and it is much more difficult to find a decent newspaper. Going online I can now look at newspapers from around the world and am even more inspired to shoot. I do miss sitting on the tube holding a few morning papers and sipping a cup of tea. As a photographer I have a need to see what other photographers are doing and cannot understand why people do not buy more magazine and subscribe online. For the cost of some terrible cheap fast food one can feed the soul.
Veasey Conway says:

October 29, 2009 at 6:51 pm

Some people have touched on this point as well, but I just want to reiterate it:

It is a no-brainer to get something for free as opposed to the same thing for a price. Especailly when you are a poor student. It’s not their fault news organizations are giving it away for free. Your students are smart for accessing the news in this way.

Maybe newspapers themselves should support photographers (and the rest of the people that make the news) by not giving it away for free.

I do understand the point that you should support something you care about or are trying to make a career of, but you need to look at the larger picture.

I would rather not support a dying medium (newspaper). This is even more true when it is a field I am looking to get into. I don’t want to hold back the progression of news any longer.

As much as I love newspapers, young people these days simply don’t identify with them. Accessing their news online allows them to interact in it in ways newspapers simply cannot do. You could also have asked them “how many of you use a victrola?”

Plus, I think it is a little odd to assume that students should be supporting professionals. Students, first and foremost, have to support their education.
Ian Aleksander Adams says:

October 29, 2009 at 9:17 pm

also, have you seen newspapers lately? Especially locals?

It’s a joke.

90% of the content is AP, and much of the original content is crap. And most of THAT is gossip columns and cooking tips. Show me some real, interesting news in a local newspaper and I’d be more than happy to buy it.
Agenzia Fotografica says:

October 30, 2009 at 8:52 am

Well I believe that all photojournalist are facing a great fear.
Is obvious that a lot of content as to be free… No one want to pay to see pictures and to read good stories. The problem is how to produce great content? How to rais money to produce content?
Martin says:

November 2, 2009 at 10:47 pm

I wasn’t speaking in caps when I said that line quoted in the body of the above text and it is out of context. Newspapers should be paid for their online content. They just need to figure out how to generate their income in an imaginative way. If NY Times wants to stop emailing me the paper for free every morning, well, there is always Reuters, the LA Times, ect.

There is a hundred thousand entities making a profit on the internet everyday without charging directly for content. They’ll figure it out.
Stephen Sidlo says:

November 10, 2009 at 7:02 pm

It does sound different over here in the UK. I graduated last year from a PJ degree, I was buying around 2 papers per week but it so were others. The only thing the majority were not doing was joining journalism unions, visiting exhibitions and so on which begged the question. My thesis was on the government slant and control of the mass media through these papers. I believe a look through paid, un paid, forum, panel discussion and books get an all rounded view of our modern world.