Showing posts with label detroit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label detroit. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

An imperfect solution in Detroit

The announcements now being made in Detroit appear to confirm the earlier rumors:

Changes due to occur in first quarter 2009 include:
  • Expanding digital information channels that provide news and information to a variety of audiences when, where and how they want it.

  • Limiting newspaper home delivery to Thursdays, Fridays and Sundays while selling printed copies at newsstand seven days a week.

  • Providing subscribers daily access to electronic editions, exact copies of each day's printed newspapers.

It's not the best solution, I think. While managers told an employee meeting there would be tens of millions of dollars in savings (stemming from about 200 job cuts, newsprint savings and distribution savings), it keeps in place two separate press runs on most days while failing to differentiate the two papers more clearly. And implementation will be a nightmare, I'm afraid.

The plan looks like a compromise between the status quo and a real rationalization of the market, which had been my suggestion last week. I put forward a Thursday-Friday-Sunday Free Press coupled with a Monday-Friday News distributed free. Advantages: fewer press runs, two distinct missions and markets, greater circulation during the week, and easier to implement.

Either scenario would, by design, push more readers to electronic editions. Given the findings of a just-released Gannett poll tracking consumer news preferences, that's a good strategy, although it will get fierce resistance from many, particularly older readers. The graph posted by Paul Gillin from this poll shows that a year from now, the Internet will surpass local newspapers as a daily news source. (And local newspapers have been behind local TV news for a long time.) Better for newspapers to go with that trend, by adopting online-first strategies, than to continue trying to fight it. That seems to be the plan in Detroit, whatever the imperfections of the print distribution scheme.

Friday, December 12, 2008

Detroit: Doomsday, or a new day?

Yesterday's speculations about the future of Detroit's newspapers have now yielded clear confirmation that something big is up.

If the Detroit Newspaper Partnership shakeup was to have been limited to doing its share of the current round of 10 percent workforce reductions at Gannett, those cuts would have been announced over the past week or two. Instead, the Free Press reports today (as leaked yesterday to Gannett Blog) that CEO David Hunke confirmed in an e-mailed memo that a more fundamental change is in the cards. The rumors are that it'll be drastic--Gannett Blog's description:
Under the purported plan, one or both Detroit papers would end home delivery entirely, except for perhaps two or three days a week -- the more-lucrative Thursday, Friday and Sunday editions. Other days, there would be some sort of slimmed-down single-copy-only version. And everyone would be encouraged to subscribe to already-available electronic editions of the Freep and the News.
If any of this turns out to be right, Detroit will be the first major U. S. city where the old daily newspaper model is broken and a risky new experimental strategy is implemented. Reactions are understandably mixed:

Alan Mutter, the Newsosaur calls it "Motown Madness," and seems to assume that all the potential downsides will materialize. There are no upsides in his view:
In moving to intermittent home delivery, the Motown papers run two potentially fatal risks:
  • Significantly reducing daily newspaper consumption among the most loyal print readers.
  • Triggering a further erosion of already weak print advertising revenues.
He quotes extensively a former Gannett circulation exec who believes strongly in the value of home delivery. This is not surprising; most circulation executives I've known advocated for years that newspapers should refrain from publishing all their content online in order to force readers to buy print.

The influential Madrid designer Juan Antonia Giner (who is very fond of one-sentence paragraphs) is similarly critical in Innovations in Newspapers:

You cannot survive by offering the print product only a few days a week.

Reading a print newspaper is a daily habit.

If you want to survive, you need to produce a “necessary newspaper” not an “occasional newspaper.”

U.S. newspapers are lost, confused and in the hands of publishers and managers who don’t want to invest in the future.

Don’t want to invest in journalism.

Don’t want to innovate.

Don’t want to compete.

This is lack of vision.

Lack of faith in change.

Just greed, greed, greed.

On the positive side, there's me (in yesterday's post):
But with a dismal economic scene in Detroit, with or without an auto bailout, it will be nearly impossible for the JOA to be profitable in its current configuration. No amount of cost-cutting will do the trick. The only way out is, in fact, to "blow up the organization" and launch an entirely new business model. Under the circumstances, this kind of thinking ought to help Gannett's battered stock price, which can't sink much lower, in any case. And MediaNews should be pleased to go along for the ride; since they have total downside protection, they can only win.
Look for a bold rationalization of the market that pushes the boundaries of what's permissible both under anti-trust and FCC rules. In my mind, this should include: a big shift to an online-first-and-foremost culture; a Free Press published Thursdays and Sundays; a slim, Monday-Friday Detroit News free paper; and a strong alliance between the Free Press and a leading TV broadcaster in town. Certainly this kind of scenario entails more job cuts, but it would represent a strategic restructuring that has a good chance of succeeding, not a tactical retrenchment that's just a step on the way to oblivion. We'll find out Tuesday whether David Hunke is a strategist, or a tactician.
And over at Poynter, Rick Edmonds, while not directly addressing the Detroit situation, provides insight on the digital redirection Gannett is engaged in:
[T]he thrust of the Gannett story is that the company is making itself into a digital-intensive enterprise as quickly as possible. Its most recent acquisition is a small company, Ripple 6, that provides marketing solutions for social networking media. Gannett has, at the same time, built sites focused on moms, high school sports and local entertainment. Collectively, the sites are generating traffic of between 1.2 and 2.1 million unique visitors per month each and users spend an impressive 13 minutes per visit. So the elements are coming together for building a new line of business.
Edmonds also links to Gannett CEO Craig Dubow's comments during UBS Media Week, which provide further context:
It's a tougher time for newspapers, but Craig Dubow, Gannett's chairman, president and CEO, has a basic answer for the continued existence of newspapers: consumers will always need content and advertisers will need to reach them. As for why newspapers are the best vehicles for that connection, Dubow turned, interestingly enough, not to print, but to Gannett's web properties. In particular, Dubow, speaking with two other Gannett (NYSE: GCI) execs at the UBS Global Media and Communications (PDF) conference, touted a forthcoming program called ContentOne, which he said "will completely change the way we share content across the company, especially at the local level. It will be created using the web start-up model." It should be up sometime in Q1. The idea is "local content on a national level," and will use the regionally focused sites MomsLikeMe and Metromix as the foundation.
The point here is that Gannett appears to be acting on the realization that printed newspapers are doomed because of demographics. The average daily printed newspaper reader is close to 60 years old. Before long, therefore, printed newspapers will be a niche medium targeting retired people. That is not a sustainable business model. Meanwhile, the younger the demographic, the less likely it is to read newsprint. Among 20-somethings, print readership is near zero, and nothing publishers do will induce them to pick up a printed newspaper on a regular basis.

One newspaper publisher, The Thomson Corporation, looked at these trends and made the strategic choice in the late 1990s to sell its newspaper holdings (when prices were still very good), and to refocus itself as "the world’s leading source of intelligent information for businesses and professionals." If Gannett has decided to similarly refocus on becoming the leading source of intelligent information for consumers, that must lead them in the direction of web first, print secondary, and will be a central element in their decisions for Detroit and other markets.

(Note: corrected spelling of 'Thomson' 12/12 10:17 pm)

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Will Gannett, in Detroit, go boldly where no media company has gone before?

Jim Hopkins at Gannett Blog is speculating on speculation that there will be a radical restructuring of the Detroit Free Press/Detroit News publishing operation, with an announcement possible at a rumored employee meeting slated for next Tuesday, December 16 :
The Gannett-controlled publisher of the Detroit Free Press and The Detroit News is working on something super-duper-secret called "Project Griffin." [Actually, apparently it's 'Griffon.'] It would represent an enormous gamble by Gannett and its partner, MediaNews Group, to staunch multimillion-dollar losses in a city whose economy is cratering around the auto industry crisis. Hanging in the balance are the jobs of perhaps 2,000 employees.

Yet with nothing to lose but, well, more losses, the idea is to blow up the traditional newspaper business model in an especially dramatic way. A formal announcement could come as soon as Tuesday -- if you believe the speculation.

Under the purported plan, one or both Detroit papers would end home delivery entirely, except for perhaps two or three days a week -- the more-lucrative Thursday, Friday and Sunday editions. Other days, there would be some sort of slimmed-down single-copy-only version. And everyone would be encouraged to subscribe to already-available electronic editions of the Freep and the News.
This plan is also reported at Blogging for Michigan. The Tuesday meeting is apparently confirmed in an email this morning from CEO David Hunke.

This concept resembles the frequency-reduction scenario I've explored previously, and that has also been mentioned by Alan Mutter, Tim Windsor and Steve Outing. As I commented on Gannett Blog:
Certainly a money-losing metro should be considering a conversion to digital-first publication combined with printing just 1-3 days per week (plus a commuter freebie where appropriate). This [kind of restructuring] cuts a ton of expense while potentially retaining most of the ad revenue; and more importantly, it takes the right step into the future, while continued cost-cutting within the old model is a guaranteed dead end. The Tribune bankruptcy and Rocky Mountain News closing are going to stimulate a lot more of this kind of thinking.
Moreover, publishing less than 4 days a week would free publishers from that pesky FCC cross-ownership rule.

Is the rumored plan plausible? Let's look at the situation on the ground. The Gannett Company owns the Free Press; MediaNews Group owns the Detroit News; they jointly own The Detroit News Inc. (aka Detroit Media Partnership), which is the agency that operates both papers under a Joint Operating Agreement—but Gannett owns 95 percent of the operating partnership; MediaNews has only 5 percent. So Gannett is in charge of everything except the News newsroom. (See SEC filings for the exact structure.)

MediaNews is savvy about JOAs; they've been involved in more of them than any other chain. In Denver, they ended a long-running war with E. W. Scripps by means of a JOA combining the Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News. But that combo loses money, and Scripps has put the Rocky up for sale; the virtually certain outcome will be that the Rocky closes and MediaNews at last has uncontested dominance in the Denver newspaper market.

Gannett might wish that MediaNews would similarly fold their tent and leave Detroit, but that won't happen, because under the terms of the Detroit JOA, MediaNews is "reimbursed for its news and editorial costs associated with publishing The Detroit News," and if the JOA is profitable, it also receives a "fixed preferred distribution" set at $4 million for 2008 and 2009, and declining in later years. In other words, MediaNews is guaranteed not to lose money in Detroit. Assuming the JOA is currently in the red, they're forgoing the fixed preferred distribution, but their newsroom expenses are fully covered. (By contrast, in Denver Scripps had to fund news operations out of the meager JOA proceeds, so it was operating at a loss.)

In this situation, MediaNews has no incentive to pull out, and Gannett can not force the issue by offering a buyout without running into potential anti-trust issues. They need to maintain a two-newspaper market to avoid the regulators. But with a dismal economic scene in Detroit, with or without an auto bailout, it will be nearly impossible for the JOA to be profitable in its current configuration. No amount of cost-cutting will do the trick. The only way out is, in fact, to "blow up the organization" and launch an entirely new business model. Under the circumstances, this kind of thinking ought to help Gannett's battered stock price, which can't sink much lower, in any case. And MediaNews should be pleased to go along for the ride; since they have total downside protection, they can only win.

Look for a bold rationalization of the market that pushes the boundaries of what's permissible both under anti-trust and FCC rules. In my mind, this should include: a big shift to an online-first-and-foremost culture; a Free Press published Thursdays and Sundays; a slim, Monday-Friday Detroit News free paper; and a strong alliance between the Free Press and a leading TV broadcaster in town. Certainly this kind of scenario entails more job cuts, but it would represent a strategic restructuring that has a good chance of succeeding, not a tactical retrenchment that's just a step on the way to oblivion. We'll find out Tuesday whether David Hunke is a strategist, or a tactician.