That's what my old editor, Frank Keegan, said today. And that's exactly right.
I truly believe that if the Press could land in responsible hands, it could not just make money again. It could also make a difference.
I can't understand why so many papers are held by companies that think of them as just another commodity, no different than cereal or toothpaste. That's why it's no big deal to them to kill off a paper, because there's always another brand of toothpaste or a different box of cereal.
Newspapers are so much more than that. They are the voice of a community, the only soapbox for ordinary people to stand up to those in power, the only way that insiders don't rule by default. They're so integral to democracy that our founders made sure the First Amendment protected them.
And how sad will it be if in the future teachers have to explain what "the press" was in order for them to understand what the First Amendment was all about.
The internet has done wonders for free speech, but it amounts, in the end, to a furious cacophony, a babble from the rabble rather than a way to hold our leaders accountable the way a free press can, and should.
Don't let the killers get away with this. Let's save this newspaper.
*******Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
10 comments:
Why is it that a free newspaper like the Bristol Observer can survive but a pay-for-it daily paper can't?
Is it possible that the financial aspect of the paper was mis-managed?
You should start a completely online newspaper, with a concentration on local issues. That is what the original Press was all about and is the only reason I keep my subscription. You do a great job on this blog of covering local issues. The news agout the demise of th Press is a perfect example, it was here before it was even in the Courant, and it STILL hasn't been covered in the Press. I can get all the other news that fills up the present paper anywhere and in a more timely fashion. I would pay for an online edition to a real local newspaper. I believe you could sell advertising on such a site. I would also be interested in investing in such a venture, should you think this idea has merit.
Of course it was mismanaged.
Personally, I think an online-only newspaper has great potential because its costs are so low compared to the dead trees edition. I do believe there is a market for local news and that there ought to be some advertisers who'd want to reach the people who would read it, particularly given that more of the online readers would be younger than the print edition these days.
In the end, it wouldn't surprise me if this is what happens in Bristol.
What would it take to pull it off remains a bit of a mystery to me, but I plan to investigate it, and would certainly be interested in hearing from anyone who might invest in the idea.
Yes, definitely mismanaged. Without a doubt.
What is the circulation of the Press, and how has it changed over the past 6-10 years? That would be important to know.
I miss Frank Keegan.
The problem with on-line papers are that few people actually are willing to pay for them. Perhaps it's because people feel if they can hold it in their hand, take it into the bathroom, or line their gerbil cage with it, then it isn't worth buying it.
"The problem with on-line papers are that few people actually are willing to pay for them."
If it gets to the point where there is no source of local daily news, that might change. Even the Courant severely reduced it's "towns" coverage. What will be left?
Newspapers are not dying.
Newspapers are not being murdered.
Newspapers are committing SUICIDE.
Post a Comment