Google’s 1-Stop Online Access

Google One Pass has the potential to revolutionize the way publishers keep direct relationships with customers and readers access digital content across websites and mobile apps.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt notes the new service lets publishers set their own prices and terms for their digital content.

“Readers who purchase from a One Pass publisher can access their content on tablets, smartphones and websites using a single sign-on with an e-mail and password,’’ Google says.

“The service helps publishers authenticate existing subscribers so that readers don't have to re-subscribe in order to access their content on new devices.”

Google One Pass is available for publishers in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain.

Google Vs. Apple

Speculation already has begun about how the Google service will compete with Apple's new subscription service, which it has just made available to all publishers of content-based apps on the App Store.

Apple will keep 30% of the revenue from any new subscribers it brings to the publisher via the App Store. Critics in the media industry say the Apple cut is excessive.

Google says it will keep just 10 percent.

“Our intention is to make no money on it,” Schmidt says. “We want the publishers to make all the money.”

The race to claim attract digital newspaper subscribers comes as struggling publishers seek to boost the money they make from readers who use computers, tablets and smartphones. Some newspaper publishers have stepped up paywall efforts.

As Daily Finance notes, Apple has a major critical advantage over Google.

The App Store has tremendous traffic from owners of iPhones and iPads. There are over 160 million devices that run on the Apple iOS system.

Google does not have a comparable and ready customer base because its Android mobile OS is used by hardware companies over which Google has little control. Google's Apps MarketPlace is smaller in both the number of offerings and downloads than the Apple store.

Google's new project may be more favorable financially to publishers, and may have other benefits for consumers, but the search giant's application “ecosystem” may not be powerful enough to support a robust online subscription service. Apple does not have such a problem.

Dead Tree News

The newspaper industry – still reeling from the one-two punch of exploding Internet growth and advertising drops from the Great Recession – may view Google One Pass as a half-hearted attempt to deflect criticism about Google searches linking to “free” online print content without compensating the original source.

“With Google One Pass, publishers can customize how and when they charge for content while experimenting with different models to see what works best for them—offering subscriptions, metered access, ‘freemium’ content or even single articles for sale from their websites or mobile apps,’’ according to the Official Google Blog.

“The service also lets publishers give existing print subscribers free (or discounted) access to digital content. We take care of the rest, including payments technology handled via Google Checkout.’’

The OGB concludes: “Our goal is to provide an open and flexible platform that furthers our commitment to support publishers, journalism and access to quality content.”

In Our View

WMB applauds the one-stop concept behind Google One Pass and sees the service as a viable alternative to Apple – arguably the runaway leader in developing new tech gadgets that capture the public’s imagination and dollars.

Some have even described Apple CEO Steve Jobs as the Thomas Edison of our time because of product innovations including iPod, iTunes, iPhone, and iPad.

Still, we have a nagging concern, as always, with anything that “controls or regulates” the Internet or the way in which consumers interact with it. Perhaps the best measurement of the new service will be whether the public embraces or rejects it.

WMB will be watching as the rivalry between Google One Pass and the App Store unfolds.

Consumers generally benefit from competition because it prompts innovation and pricing strategies out of sheer necessity.

Ken Cocuzzo

Paid Content Versus Free

Popular thinking in traditional print media, including newspapers, held that Internet users would opt for free over paid content. Who could disagree with that logic?

So, many papers gave away their content online while revenue from the print format shrank slowly until the recession years shifted the losses into hyper drive, with layoffs, buyouts and closures the end result.

But surprise: Nearly two-thirds of U.S. Internet users have paid to download or access online content such as music, movies or news articles, according to a survey.

The Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project found 65 percent of those surveyed said they paid to access or download some content, the global news agency afp.com reports.

The survey – which included phone interviews with 1,003 adults in the continental United States, of whom 755 are Internet users – offers hope for the Internet as an economic cash cow despite widespread belief that viewers only seek free content online.

A running debate between free and paid is what kept many papers (including my former employer, The Star-Ledger) from moving quickly toward a pay-wall system. The ancient print business model had no sections for an evolving digital format.

Still, the Wall Street Journal embraced the wall early on, and the New York Times is heading in that direction.

Today, even with your local paper, you might see a few graphs online before a screen prompt suggests you subscribe to receive the full story electronically. For many papers, regardless of size, the pay wall is now trending as a fact of life in a struggle for survival.

“The Internet has become a viable distribution channel for a variety of online content, especially in the era of broadband,” the Pew report said.

“The issue of people's willingness to pay for online material has enormous implications for media companies, artistic creators, and others who are hoping to sustain themselves – or grow new businesses – by raising revenues through online purchases.”

In the survey:

*33 percent of Internet users have paid for digital music online or software;
*21 percent for apps for cell phones or tablet computers;
*19 percent for digital games;
*18 percent for digital newspaper, magazine, or journal articles;
*16 percent for videos, movies, or TV shows;
*15 percent for ringtones.

“What was really surprising was that the percentage of Internet users purchasing online content is nearly the same as those purchasing other products and services, such as books and travel,” notes Jim Jansen, the author of the Pew Internet report.

From Where I Blog

As a veteran print/online journalist caught in the riptide of the Internet and the Great Recession, I find the survey’s results encouraging.

What it says is Internet viewers are discriminating consumers who recognize you sometimes have to pay for what you value as essential, regardless of the format.

If you offer quality content at a reasonable price, and back it with a solid reputation for accuracy, educated consumers will buy into your product, return to your website and spread the word.

In our consumer-driven society, it’s all about choices. For some folks it always will be just newspapers, for others a combination of print, TV and online news.

Consumer preferences will determine which formats flourish and which ones fade. The only certainty is change, and tech advances are rapidly reshaping the information landscape.

Consider this: Facebook started in 2004, the same year as the Google IPO, YouTube in 2005 and Twitter in 2006. None of these companies existed in 2000. Just imagine what we’ll see by 2020!

As for me, I practice what I preach at writenowworks.com. If you like this post, please share it.

Let’s Go To The Source

Where do you get your news information … from family, friends, coworkers, newspapers, radio, TV or the Internet? Does it matter? The source really counts and, increasingly, it’s not newspapers.

The number of Americans who say newspapers are an important source of information continues to decline, according to a survey by the The Center for the Digital Future at the USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.

Some 56 percent of Internet users surveyed agreed with the statement that newspapers were an important or very important source of information, while 68 percent said television was, and 78 percent said the Internet was, according to Mathew Ingram, blogging for gigaom.com.

The findings are part of the Annenberg School’s ongoing Digital Future Project, which has been surveying Americans on their views and behavior related to the Internet for 10 years.

Interestingly, the Annenberg survey also found a growing number of online users do not believe information they find electronically is reliable. A majority of users said less than half of the information they get from the Internet is reliable.

Americans increasingly see the Internet as an important source of information, despite the fact they view much of that information as unreliable, according to Ingram.


Depending on how you feel about Internet users in general, it’s either an example of contradictory behavior, or a sign of healthy skepticism about online media, Ingram writes.

The survey’s findings are perplexing because a large amount of Internet news content can be traced to an original source which, typically, is a newspaper. Still, it’s like the old chicken-or-egg saying – which came first?

Often news breaks online before it appears in print and the electronic version, because of print deadlines, remains fresher with frequent updates. It's now versus yesterday.

One of the things newspaper editors and reporters always pride themselves on is serving as a reliable and credible source of vital information for the public interest in a highly competitive marketplace. This blog’s co-author knows this from 30 years in newspaper newsrooms.

Sometimes it’s sensational news, like corruption at City Hall; sometimes, it’s merely about the fact property taxes are rising yet again. But the news, in dead tree format, is usually about things that matter to you, from the immigration battle in Arizona to parking meter charges in your downtown.

Regardless of whether you agree with a newspaper’s editorial policy, you can be certain any paper worth reading always goes the distance to separate itself from the competition by pursuing stories that really matter to readers. It’s the primary mission.

A secondary mission, especially for most community papers, is to serve as “the paper of record” in documenting key events (fires, accidents, elections) and individuals (profiles, obits, achievements) for historical purposes.

With growing online access to newspaper archives, this witness-to-history service becomes even more important. If it appeared first in newsprint after 1990, chances are it was archived electronically by the paper.

It’s not that newspapers are no longer relevant, but they are stuck in a 20th-century delivery format – print on paper. With rapid advances in technology, especially electronic devices such as the iPad, a faster and more portable format is in high demand by our hurry-up society.

Importance and credibility work in tandem in delivering information, regardless of the format. One only needs to look at the high traffic generated by the websites belonging to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal to understand the relationship.

Part of the reason viewers flock to NYT and WSJ online is directly connected to the print papers’ branded reputation (political views aside) for being the Source of reliable information. That belief follows to a lesser extent as you move from big-city metros to small-town community papers.

Brick-and-mortar operations for print still play a role in our fast-paced world as the foundation for what we see online. WMB and other blogs rely on information from websites whose quality can vary greatly, depending on the source. Attribution plays a big role at WMB; we make liberal use of links.

JohnDoe.com is not going to carry the same weight as cnn.com, nor is a content mill piece by a “citizen journalist” versus a story written by a Times staffer. Information gathering still requires a consumer-beware attitude, which probably explains some of contradictory findings in the Annenberg survey.

While there are infinitely more choices today for information junkies than before the Internet and cable TV, the fact is we all place value on the source of what we hear and see.

Maybe Brian Williams' take on unemployment figures means more to you than Wolf Blitzer's version of that story? Did they do some direct reporting, or did their researchers do the grunt work? Did they offer attribution for the information? The source always matters.

If newspaper owners and executives are smart street-wise folks, they will find ways to brand their print and online operations as compatible and profitable sources that target key sectors of public interest.

You can’t put the information genie back into the bottle in the Internet Age, but you can make it do your bidding with quality material pushed via varied formats that reach consumers where they live.

As for me, I practice what I preach at writenowworks.com.

Gov't Shouldn't Fix Newspapers

The U.S. government seems to be nearly everywhere these days – from health care reforms and tax gimmicks to automaker and bank bailouts. One area that should be off-limits is the newspaper industry.

Simply put, government intervention to prop up newspapers should not be a preferred option under any scenario. Anyone who has studied U.S. history knows the Founding Fathers wanted government and newspapers to operate independently of each other, with the latter in a watchdog role.

So that’s what so disturbing about the U.S. Federal Trade Commission looking for ways to “support the reinvention of journalism,” according a report by The New York Times.

Possible measures to help the troubled U.S. news business include public subsidies, charity and stronger copyright protection. The first two measures should be dropped; the third one merits some consideration.

Nobody can deny that Internet alternatives and the Great Recession have taken a huge bite out of advertising and readership for traditional print newspapers which, for the most part, continue to struggle as they seek viable business models for online publishing.

From 2007 to 2009, newspaper industry revenue fell 30 percent in the United States, though much less internationally. In 2008, advertising contributed 87 percent of newspapers’ revenues in the United States, compared with 53 percent in Germany, 50 percent in Britain and 35 percent in Japan, according to the Times.

Not surprisingly, some 15,000 U.S. journalists were either laid off or bought out by employers as the recession’s grip tightened on American consumers since late 2007. Almost one in five journalists working for American newspapers in 2001 is no longer there, according to a 2009 report by the Pew Research Center, an independent, nonpartisan public opinion research organization that studies attitudes toward politics, the press and public policy issues.

"Newspapers do not expect a whole lot of help from the government," John Sturm, CEO of the Newspaper Association of America, tells Bloomberg Businessweek. "We've never sought or asked for anything like a bailout."

In response to severe financial decline, many papers, especially the bigger metros, shrank the number of pages and sections, increased cover prices, and scaled back reporting.

Pick up your local paper today and it’s sure to be smaller, with less content for your interests than an edition from early 2007. Publishers were forced to dump many things over the side in order to survive. In some cases, what’s left is a mere shell.

Most publishers were content to sit back and let things unfold before the bust, with the notable exception of Gannett Co., America’s largest newspaper publisher, including USA Today.

While the average operating profit in 2009 for most papers was 12 percent, publicly-traded Gannett in the pre-bust days pressed for upper teens, depending on the paper’s market and demographics. Sadly, many of these “boom” profits came at the expense of employees and quality. (Disclosure: I once worked for a Gannett newspaper).

The fact is fewer than half of all American adults now regularly read a daily newspaper. Recession, lifestyle and generational issues all factor into the swift decline of print media. Plus, newspaper executives have a well-earned reputation for making poor or questionable management decisions.

Why would government intervention make a difference?

The one exception for government oversight might be in copyright protection, especially with the Internet changing the rules of the game. Newspapers, the Associated Press, and Google have locked horns over establishing a balance between aggregation of credited content and outright lifting of material.

As Times reporter Eric Pfanner points out: “So far, newspapers have moved only halfheartedly to defend their copyrights online under existing legislation, because they have been held in thrall to the idea that giving away their content would make new revenue appear. Fortunately, this is now being reconsidered.’’

Public subsidies and charity aren’t solutions to what ails the newspaper industry. It’s up to newspaper executives to get beyond the “Chicken Little” stage and embrace changes in all forms which serve older readers while attracting younger ones. They need recognize there’s lots of brain power in the newsrooms, not just in the offices.

News Corp. Chairman and CEO Rupert Murdoch in December warned against the "heavy hand" of federal intervention, saying newspapers could be harmed by over-regulation or efforts to subsidize the industry, reports Bloomberg Businessweek writer Olga Kharif. WMB agrees with Murdoch, whose Dow Jones & Company, a division of News Corp., publishes The Wall Street Journal.

If the U.S. government crosses the line between it and the Fourth Estate, through financial incentives to bail out a shaken industry, there’s no going back. An independent press, free to criticize, question and report, will be seriously hampered. Whose interests will be served? Not taxpayers, that much is certain.

Imagine if the U.S. government controlled reporting on the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Would the rest of the country fully grasp the scope of the crisis and its impact if it were not for the unfettered media, in all forms? Would we really know how helpless and clueless our big government is to manage affairs right here at home?

Newspapers will survive because most journalists are resilient, determined to get the full story and working to earn the public’s trust – despite stupid decisions by owners and executives, shifting public interest, and competing alternatives.

As someone once said, “The pen is mightier than the sword.” In many ways, that still holds true. Let’s not allow the ink to dry up with yet another “government solution” to a problem that can take care of itself, warts and all.

As for me, I practice what I preach at writenowworks.com.

Where The Jobs Are ... And Not

Job trends through 2018 favor those trained in health care and computer system management. What if you don’t have the aptitude or desire to enter those fields?

Based on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ projected employment changes for 2008-2018, you might want to rethink your career and job goals – regardless of the online and TV ads encouraging you to go back to school for a degree in XYZ because “money is available from the federal government.”

Growth occupations include those in management, scientific and technical consulting; offices of physicians; computer systems design and related services; general merchandise stores; employment services; local government (excluding education and hospitals); home health care services; services for the elderly and those with disabilities; nursing care facilities; and full-service restaurants.

Decline occupations include those in department stores; semiconductor and other electronic component manufacturing; postal service; motor vehicle parts manufacturing; printing and related support activities; cut- and-sew apparel manufacturing; newspaper publishing; support work for mining; wired telecommunications carriers; and gasoline stations.

“Registered nurses’ projected growth rate of 22 percent (about 582,000 jobs) is well above the 10 percent average for all occupations,’’ the iHireJobNetwork reports. “Employment growth for registered nurses will be driven by the medical needs of an aging population. In addition, registered nurses are expected to provide more primary care as a low-cost alternative to physician-provided care. Job opportunities should be excellent.”

The “aging population” is the Baby Boomers, folks born between 1946 and 1964, whose generational size has reshaped U.S. priorities for decades and will continue to do so into the future (Disclosure: I’m an aging Boomer!). Simply put, greater numbers of Boomers with health issues affecting their daily activities need more health care, so nursing will be in demand.

“The number of home health aides and personal and home care aides is projected to grow by 836,700 over the over the 2008–18 period,’’ iHireJobNetwork reports. "The 48 percent projected growth rate of home health aides and personal and home care aides are also much faster than average. This growth, together with the need to replace workers who leave the occupation permanently, should result in excellent job prospects.” (Home health aides and personal and home care aides comprise two occupations tabulated separately by the BLS.)

Overall, projections by the BLS show an aging and more racially and ethnically diverse labor force, and employment growth in service-providing industries. More than half of the new jobs will be in professional and related occupations and service occupations. In addition, occupations where a post secondary degree or award is usually required are expected to account for one-third of total job openings during the 10-year projection period.

Job openings from replacement needs – those which occur when workers who retire or otherwise leave their occupations need to be replaced – are projected to be more than double the number of openings because of economic growth, according to the BLS.

The projections for continued declines in manufacturing and newspaper publishing come as no surprise for those who watch industry trends.


Manufacturing (reduced inventories and outsourced work for cheaper overseas labor) and newspaper publishing (Internet competition coupled with advertising declines) aren’t likely to see projected growth rates for jobs anytime soon. Both have significantly cut jobs during the Great Recession and probably will continue to shed bodies indefinitely, with few exceptions.

The U.S. Postal Service making the BLS decline list is a big no-brainer. How many of us pay our bills online, and how many send e-mails instead of hand-written letters to friends and family? To save money, the postal service is looking to end Saturday delivery. The check may be in the mail, but there’s no projected job growth in that line of work.

Gasoline stations? I doubt anybody makes it these days just selling gas. You need a convenience store or some other compatible use (service and repairs?) to keep a roof over your head and the bills paid. My local gas guy, in business for 30+ years, told his son to find another occupation because he planned to sell and retire. “There’s no money in it,’’ my guy told me.

Make no mistake about it, the economic meltdown that began in December 2007 jolted industries, wiped out some jobs completely and greatly curtailed long-term growth prospects for other types of business because of the ripple effect.

Simply put, some jobs which existed before ’07 are never coming back or are greatly reduced because the demand has declined with changes in consumer priorities, in some cases radically altered.

What does this all mean in 2010? Choose carefully when you pursue a new job or a career degree in XYZ – you want something with recession resistance, or you might find yourself blogging about the good old days, again.

As for me, I practice what I preach at writenowworks.com.

Paper Tiger Turns Clueless

Imagine we’re in a time machine which took us to 2006, the last full year before the Great Recession started pummeling most hard-working people in this country. Our jobs seemed somewhat secure and our retirement plans within reach.

Few of us suspected in ’06 that industries and paychecks were about to slide to a place the United States hadn’t seen since the 1930s. In the newsroom where I worked, everyone was being asked by upper management about “reinventing” the newspaper, making it more viable for print readers and online viewers.

My recommendation focused on the way people lived, by having the paper embrace the electronic world through portable devices because that business format seemed to be gaining traction among potential readers, especially those under 40 (the parade began with cell phones and laptops, and continues now with Kindle and iPad).

By the time our “reinventing” input was sought, however, it already was too late for much of the newspaper industry (with the notable exception of The Wall Street Journal). We spent the remainder of the time before the bust began in late ’07 debating whether we should charge for online content or provide it for free.

With these events in the rear view mirror, it came as no surprise when the results of a recent poll of newspaper and broadcast news editors concluded American journalism is in decline, and nearly half of them believe their employers will go out of business if they do not find new sources of revenue.

“Among print editors, 18 percent said their papers were actively pursuing the idea of charging readers for access to their Web sites, while 58 percent said it was under consideration,’’ reporter Richard Perez-Pena writes for The New York Times. “Twenty-three percent said they believed that in three years, such subscription fees would be their primary source of online revenue, having overtaken advertising.”

The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism polled members of two industry groups, the American Society of News Editors and the Radio Television Digital News Association. Other poll findings:

•48 percent of the editors who participated said that without a significant new income stream, their organizations could not remain solvent for more than 10 years; 31 percent gave them five years or less.

•58 percent of the editors said journalism was headed in the wrong direction, especially in an era of shrinking newsrooms; 62 percent said the Internet had changed the profession’s fundamental values, with most citing a loosening of standards.


“When asked why the industry was in such trouble, nearly half the editors said that in good times, the demands for profit margins were excessive, while many others said their organizations were too slow to embrace and invest in the Internet,” Perez-Pena reports. “And 30 percent of the print editors said their papers should have begun charging Internet readers long ago.”

Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, captures the irony of the situation – professionals whose jobs depend on anticipating the “what next” of news were caught like deer-in-the-headlights when it came to evolving technology.

“Two years ago, we might have seen a higher number (of editors) saying this was beyond our control,” Rosenstiel says. “I think there’s more awareness of innovative approaches to online business and advertising that they didn’t take but other people did, like Google and Yahoo.”

The seeds of the damage sustained by the newspaper industry in recent years were planted in the mid-1990s, when the Internet began to take hold among American consumers who bought PCs and Macs. The Web’s business model continued to evolve while many newspaper executives turned away and believed, naively, that somehow everything would take care of itself.

It didn’t, and the end result: 5,200 jobs were lost in 2009, or 13,500 positions since 2007, according to the American Society of News Editors in its latest survey of newspaper newsrooms. Still, there is an upside to those disturbing numbers.

“It's a slowing of job loss since 2008, when nearly 6,000 journalists left the industry through buyouts and layoffs,’’
writes Eric Deggans, St. Petersburg Times TV/media critic, in The Feed blog. “According to ASNE, U.S. newsrooms have lost more than 25 percent of their workforce in nine years, declining to levels the industry hasn't seen since the mid-1970s.”

I was among the 6,000 shown the exit door. I had a great 30-year run in a variety of challenging positions, everything from a print reporter to an online editor. Every day was different, never really dull. I miss the people and the stories, both inside and outside the newsroom.

What I don’t miss are the shortsighted newspaper executives who contributed to the mess that became our industry. They lost sight of the “what next” of technology, a pretty basic concept for anyone who wants to stay in business today, and it cost all of us who care about quality journalism in all forms.

As for me, I practice what I preach at writenowworks.com.

Faint Life Signs: Temp Work Rising

If you work in construction or the information industry be grateful you still have a job, according to recently released data by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. But if you’re looking for jobs across many fields, a growing trend seems to be building in your favor: temp work.

Construction employment fell by 64,000 in February, about in line with the average monthly job loss over the prior six months. Since December 2007, employment in construction has fallen by 1.9 million. Sales of new homes have dipped in recent weeks, according to media reports.

Employment in the information industry dropped by 18,000 in February. Since December 2007, job losses in information have totaled 297,000. Many of the job losses in this sector have come from the print industry, where layoffs recently leveled off.

Employment in manufacturing was essentially unchanged in February; retail trade was also unchanged in February, after a sizable increase in January. Media reports say the demand for durable goods – washers, dryers, ranges and other “big ticket” items – has seen a significant rise in recent weeks.


In February, temporary help services added 48,000 jobs. Since reaching a low point in September 2009, temporary help services has risen by 284,000. What seems to be a trend is companies hiring temp workers who may earn full-time status if demand increases and/or existing staffers leave.

Specifically, temp jobs are available in public and private sectors at nearly full-time hours but with reduced or no benefits. This approach offers a “foot-in-the-door” for the unemployed or career changers; it provides employers with a means to fill work gaps and review the available pool of job candidates. It's a win-win for workers and employers.

For now, the healthiest job growth areas of the U.S. economy continue to be in government, health care and education – the strongest areas since the Great Recession began in December 2007.

But there are some dark clouds on the education front, especially in New Jersey, where public school districts may be forced to lay off thousands because of drastic cuts in state aid proposed by Gov. Chris Christie. The Garden State, which has the highest tax rate in America, is heavily in debt and unable to meet financial obligations in many areas, including pension funding for state employees.

In February, the U.S. number of unemployed persons, at 14.9 million, was essentially unchanged, and the unemployment rate remained at 9.7 percent. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) was 6.1 million in February and has been about that level since December. About four in 10 unemployed persons have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more.

State-by-state unemployment largely deepened last month, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Virginia dropped 32,000 jobs in February alone, California lost 20,000, and Michigan and Pennsylvania each shed 16,000 jobs.

The ranks of the long-term unemployed, especially those in the information industry, will likely swell in Hawaii, according to a report by Rachel Kaufman at MediaJobsDaily.

In a filing with Hawaii's Department of Labor, the owner of The Honolulu Star-Bulletin said the newspaper will be laying off half of its 300 employees as it pursues its takeover of the Honolulu Advertiser, the Advertiser reports. Oahu Publications said it would cut those 150 jobs whether or not the Bulletin is sold or merged with the Advertiser. Oahu Publications, owner of the Bulletin, is buying rival Honolulu Advertiser from Gannett Co., Inc., owner of newspapers, television stations and Web sites. Gannett has sent layoff notices to all 600 Advertiser employees, but it's unclear how many of those employees would be rehired when the sale completes.

Hawaii, President Obama’s onetime home, is far from a paradise of jobs. So these laid-off newspaper employees might have to relocate to mainland America to look for hard-to-find work, especially if they’re journalists.

The newspaper industry, because of the recession and the Internet, is undergoing dramatic changes. 2009 was the worst year the newspaper business has seen in decades, according to figures released by the Newspaper Association of America.
Print advertising revenue fell 27.2 percent, or more than $10 billion, from 2008 – which was, at the time, the industry’s worst year since the Depression in the 1930s, writes Richard Perez-Pena, blogging for The New York Time's Media Decoder.

From its peak in 2005, newspaper ad revenue dropped 44.2 percent, from more than $49.4 billion to less than $27.6 billion last year. The last time advertisers spent less on newspapers was in 1986.

What does all this mean?

We’ve got a long way to go before the U.S. economy shows more than faint signs of a pulse after nearly 27 months of recession that has left many of us shaken and stirred.

As for me, I practice what I preach at writenowworks.com.

Shrinking Papers Vs. Content Mills

The final of Sir Isaac Newton's three Laws of Motion states that for every action (force) in nature, there is an equal and opposite reaction. While this law is grounded in physics, it also has application to today's damaged economy, in particular the newspaper industry.

It's easy to make such a comparison when one considers how so-called Content Mills are going viral in replacing dead-tree journalism and companion Web sites in the face of drastic cuts in staff and coverage dogging the Fourth Estate.

Call it stodgy and perhaps a bit dated in a rapidly expanding paperless society, but paper news delivery at least gave readers some reasonable assurance that a real news organization captured the information before them.

Sorry to break the stereotype but journalists are trained professionals who skillfully gather news and report what they've learned in a way that brings insight and clarity to the average reader about a range of topics, from silly and simple to complex and horrific.

Somehow, in this dreadful economy, many have begun to question the value professional journalists bring to our society by thinking anyone can go out, cover the news (however you define it), bring back the facts and package it in a reader-friendly way. How else can you explain the rise of Content Mills such as examiner.com, about.com, suite101.com, and demandstudios.com.

I don't begrudge folks trying their hands at journalism and writing (Disclosure: I'm biased on the subject because of my 30 years as a newspaper journalist). But people who think pen, pad, paper, iPad, video camera or phone makes you a reporter are borderline delusional.

The process of becoming a good journalist takes time, practice, patience, and a willingness on the part of veteran news people to show rookies the ropes. It was -- and still should be -- an apprenticeship while you learn what the craft requires and what you need to bring to the table.

Why do I think Content Mills are so bad?

It's simply because they make it seem anyone can write and report like a professional journalist. These crank-it-out operations, which are littering the Web today from job boards to topic postings, offer false hope to those who want to find expression -- and some paying work -- through writing.

Most of the Content Mills pay a mere fraction, if anything, to contributing writers (some, sadly, former journalists) to provide content on a variety of topics. How is this any better than Wikipedia, a free open-source encyclopedia which accepts contributions from anybody willing to cite source material?

It all comes down to one word: standards.

If you want to believe everything you read in print and on the Web is 100 percent accurate, then I have a bridge to sell you in the middle of the Arizona desert.

But if you have an interest in maintaining standards and the quality of the news you receive, then I'd advise you keep a firm grip on dead-tree reporting and its next-of-kin, newspaper Web sites. Why settle for less?

As for me, I practice what I preach at writenowworks.com.

The Pitch For Social Networking

No matter where you travel online these days, experts encourage you to promote yourself and your business at social networking sites such as LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter.

Each of these sites has its own "rules of the road," especially at LinkedIn, where individual categorized groups offer open discussion on a variety of topics relating to the group's specialty, for example, Public Relations and Communications Professionals.

As a communications specialist, I monitor discussions among various groups and comment on subjects of interest, so this topic line caught my eye: Cover Letters Are Worthless And Outdated.

OK, I took the bait and clicked the link because from everything I know and read, cover letters remain key in formal job applications even if there is no guarantee they're ever read by recruiters or employers.

It took 12 to 15 paragraphs of babble about the blogger's 30 years in executive recruiting to finally get to the point where he pitches his service to job seekers.

In my former industry, newspapers, we would have said he buried the lead and forced readers to labor over the point of the piece. An editor or senior reporter would have whipped it into shape before publication.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with pitching your business to a targeted audience whose members include the unemployed, under-employed and disaffected.

If you're a regular reader of this blog, you see my professional background and business pitch in the right sidebar every time you visit We Mean Business. There's no fluff: It is what it is (an old newspaper saying for boilerplate material).

What I find troublesome is the recruiter's sloppy, meandering approach on a social networking site to offer a "deeply discounted" webinar for job seekers. His service may be legitimate and worthwhile, but his effort was poorly crafted with a big buildup to a lame sales pitch.

The online reader bait he used -- challenging the value of cover letters -- was an effective hook to draw attention, but it got wasted. The letdown came after you clicked and read the first few paragraphs of his post. It left you scratching your head as to why you were learning his life's story.

The point is social networking can be a great way to market a business or pitch a service. It also can be your undoing if handled poorly. If your message matters, take the time to package it properly.

I recall a big sign in one of my old newsrooms: Who is going to read this story and why?

If you're using a social networking site to find and connect with customers or clients, consider this Q&A before you post online. Question: Who is going to read this pitch and why? Answer: Somebody who wants you to get to the point of what you're selling.

As for me, I practice what I preach in this blog and at writenowworks.com.

Newspapers: Survival Of The Fittest

It's a staggering and sobering fact that more than 40,000 newspaper jobs were lost this year, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. No Merry Christmas for those who remain employed in this decimated industry or those who were forced to leave through layoffs or buyouts.

The number of newspaper jobs lost for 2009 is nearly twice the 21,000 cut in 2008 and more than any single year in the past 10 years, according to Joe Strupp, reporter for Editor & Publisher, a 125-year-old magazine which appears to be yet another casualty of the recession. In an all-too-familiar story, advertising revenue, the lifeblood of the print industry, has slowed to a trickle.

E&P, sadly, is on the ropes. January may be its last print edition.

"Even with furloughs, salary cuts and numerous retirement fund freezes, publishers lopped off a tragic number of positions, even as they sought to expand online and, of course, increase workloads for those who remain,'' Strupp wrote as part of his top 10 newspaper business stories of 2009. "The count at the end of 2009 is 284,220 jobs. In 1999, that number was at 424,500. If things don't slow down, any attempt to properly cover news, and write and edit it, will be lost if it hasn't been already."

It's unlikely the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times will disappear, though the latter is definitely cutting costs and jobs. They have specific reader followings that probably will outlast any economic downturn. What appears to be suffering the most are many daily metro papers in America's largest cities.

Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Detroit, Denver and Seattle are among the urban spots with daily newspapers on life support or already lost because of weak advertising, high delivery costs, declining readership and fierce electronic competition.

In contrast, rural and more suburban areas seem to be supporting smaller papers, weeklies for example, through niche market advertising. Check out the ads in your local weekly -- affordable and targeted to your neighborhood.

What this means for business and consumers is a highly customized market match-up. The Internet provides a global vehicle for larger B2B and B2C endeavors, but hyper local print advertising still connects closer to home, especially where readers prefer traditional ways of doing business.

Smaller papers have a lower overhead and what they produce tends to make a longer, stronger impact. Surveys, including one by the National Newspaper Association, show many readers keep a weekly in their household for days and spend more time viewing the content.

A deep recession and soaring Internet use have rocked the U.S. newspaper industry to its very foundations. Online versions of newspapers, for the most part, have not generated the kind of ad revenue that print previously did.

What remains to be seen is which publications will survive and what changes it will mean in their business models. For sure, a challenging year lies ahead for the print industry as it evolves along with technology in an uncertain economy.