Saturday, September 27, 2008

2000 Monkeys or a1 ton Gorilla.


In a just published article in BusinessWeek (click here to read) , Jon Fine ( who also keeps a media blog : FineOnMedia read here ) prophesies the imminent demise of the big-city papers. He still gives a chance to the “national” papers like the New York Times – even if for just a while longer.

It’s probably the latest of a million elegies ( it’s difficult to keep track – with one being written practically every hour ) for a medium that will go down in the history of the universe as the longest occupant of a death bed – giving even the ol’ man Bhishma a run for his record. But, I found his analysis quite interesting – tho’ it is primarily from an US market stand-point.

First, he thinks the main cause of their un-doing would be the dis-aggregation of the local advertisements ( especially Classifieds ) at the low end to “Ultra-cheap” on-line options such as “Craigslist click here ” or at the high-end to the free-monthly glossies.

Second, the content needs ( and consequently - “editorial energies” ) to Blogs or other independent “on-line endeavours” such as “MinnPost” ( which defines its mission “to provide high quality journalism to news-intense people of Minnesota click here to read).

And, for those publications who are still deluding themselves with the hope of garnering revenues from the “sub-classified local segment (such a pizzerias and dry-cleaners) – he quotes the CEO of a Local Media Research firm, who compares local advertisements to “2,000 – two pound monkeys” ( as opposed to a 1 ton Gorilla – therefore making it a very “unorganized and dirty business”).

I am not sure how far the comparison would exactly hold true for a market like India. In any case there aren’t too many “big-city papers” of any significant size left – with the exception of a few ( non – Hindi ) vernaculars and just a couple of English dailies ( The Telegraph and The Hindu - tho’ they may not like to be called Regional or Local) and the same logic may not quite apply to either of these 2 categories.


By the same token, India doesn't have "national papers" like the New York Times, USA Today or WSJ ( tho' MINT is trying to be a bit of the last ). What we have - I would submit - are a bunch of 'multi-local' papers. Even the giant banyan-tree of a ToI - to my mind - is an "umbrella mother brand" under which it houses several localised editions (much like what a Brooke Bond- Lipton or Tatas do in having separate blends of tea for different states under the same brand name). So is the case in the vernacular space with a Bhaskar, Jagran and Hindustan or The Hindu, Deccan Chronicle and the New Indian Express in the south. In doing so, all of them try to straddle both ends of the market - wooing the national advertisers at one level and mopping up the local business and classifieds at another.

While this dual pronged strategy may work to hedge the risks for Indian newspapers - at least for sometime to come, I think the real game-changer could be the content back-lash, which Fine talks about. In dumbing themselves down to cater to all consituencies newspapers may be losing their plot to the more interactive media options available today thanks to the net. I am, therefore, a little tempted to quote from the 2 comments posted on the article, which lends support to his thesis.

“…… Big city newspapers have already been replaced by blogs, video postings and discussion forums ~ at least for the news addict demographic. Why read what some edited hack piece says about a political speech when I can review the entire thing online and evaluate it for myself? And why would I want to read it on a piece of dead tree, if I can instead debate it with others who are interested, and follow the links to every piece of pertinent information we can find ?”


“…a former daily reporter I used to pick up the local papers when I traveled around the US -- now I just get the Times, the Journal and the FT when I can find it -- most dailies are trying to be all things and hit lowest common denominator…….”

What do you think ??

No comments: