Share This

Showing posts with label British Media hype. Show all posts
Showing posts with label British Media hype. Show all posts

Tuesday, 19 August 2014

USA Today: US print newspapers break-ups without financial support


Washington (AFP) - Following an unprecedented series of spinoffs by major US media companies, the print news industry now faces a rocky future without financial support from deep-pocketed parent firms. 

The wave of corporate breakups comes with newspapers and magazines struggling in a transition to digital news, and shareholders of media conglomerates increasingly intolerant of the lagging print segment.

Gannett, publisher of USA Today and dozens of other newspapers, became the latest to unveil its plan, splitting its print and broadcast operations into two separate units in a move to "sharpen" the focus of each.

This follows the recently completed spinoff by Tribune Co. of its newspaper group, which includes the Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune, and Time Warner's separation of its magazine publishing group Time Inc.

Two other newspaper groups, EW Scripps and Journal Communications, announced last month they would merge and then spin off their combined newspaper operations while creating a separate entity focused on broadcasting and digital media.

The trend arguably took hold last year with Rupert Murdoch's split of his empire into separate firms focused on media-entertainment and publishing -- 21st Century Fox and the newly structured News Corp.

- 'Cast out of house' -

The wave of spinoffs "certainly plays into the perception that these are children being cast out of the house by their parents," said Mark Jurkowitz, associate director of the Pew Research Center's Journalism Project.

Newspapers were snapped up by media groups in an era when print was hugely profitable, but other segments of the media conglomerates are now driving profits, such as local television.

"The market doesn't think much of the newspaper industry's future," Jurkowitz said.

Industry consultant Alan Mutter argues that publicly traded newspaper firms still produce an average profit margin of 16 percent, higher than that of Walmart and Amazon.

But Mutter said on his blog that profits and newsroom staffing have taken a huge hit in recent years, and that newspapers have failed to do enough in the digital arena.

"Rather than reliably 'owning' their audiences as they once did in print, the internal metrics at every newspaper show an increasing dependence on the likes of Google, Facebook and Twitter to generate the traffic that is the lifeblood of any media enterprise," he said.

Dan Kennedy, a journalism professor at Northeastern University, said newspapers are recovering from the negative impact of earlier corporate tie-ups.

"It's really corporate debt and the expectations of Wall Street that have done as much to damage the newspapers business as Craigslist," Kennedy told AFP.

"Newspaper margins are still pretty good. And when you have newspapers owned by private companies without debt, some of them are doing pretty well."

Some analysts say that the breakup of big media firms may force publishers to create ways to connect with readers online. "The real problem with newspaper industry has not been with the dead tree part, it is the failure to monetize the digital eyeballs," Jurkowitz said.

"Unless there is an increase in digital revenue streams it's hard to imaging them getting out of the situation they are in."

The industry is closely watching the efforts of newspapers like the New York Times, which is experimenting with new digital access plans, and the Washington Post, which under new owner Jeff Bezos has boosted online readership to record highs.

- 'Not the death phase' -

Kennedy said that while newspapers may be profitable and an important part of the community, they may not be able to meet Wall Street's expectations for growth.

"It's not a growing business," Kennedy said.

Private owners can still keep the business in the black, said Kennedy, citing the record of Boston Globe's new owner, sports magnate John Henry.

But he said that newspapers need to make considerable investments "to make a smart transition to digital" in the coming years.

Peter Copeland, a former Scripps Howard News Service editor and general manager who now is a media consultant, said the breakups are logical and generally positive for newspapers.

"It's better for the newspapers and TV to be separate," Copeland said. "They were never a match. They are very different businesses."

Now, he said the owners "will be able to focus 100 percent on the newspapers."

Copeland said newspapers may end up severing their corporate ties and going back to their roots of local and private ownership.

"Newspapers always had difficulty" being part of corporate empires, said Copeland.

"I think newspapers are entering another phase. It's not the death phase, it's just another phase in the life cycle." - AFP

Related posts:

  Shangri-La, China LHASA, Aug. 13 -- Since British novelist James Hilton introduced the fictional "Shangri-la" to Western r...
 
Bitcoin creator mystery, who is the Face Behind the Bitcoin?
He reached out to Nakamoto through one of the Bitcoin founder's untraceable email addresses and offered his assistance. His initial message to Bitcoin's inventor read: "Bitcoin is a brilliant idea, and I want to help. What do ...
The Internet has spawned a new form of currency that’s purely digital called Bitcoin.  Picture this — a high speed car chase with a sle...
 
 Bitcoin: the new gold or a giant bubble? PETALING JAYA: Malaysians have been warned against investing in virtual or Internet money as ...

Wednesday, 18 June 2014

British media unprofessional over Chinese Premier meets Queen Elizabeth II

Queen Elizabeth II met with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and his wife in London Tuesday. However, British media had previously claimed it was the Chinese side who required a meeting with the Queen. In their reports, whether the Queen would grant an audience with Li seemed to become a bargaining chip for London. Diplomats might break out into laughter at such rhetoric. This hype only serves to reflect the narrow-mindedness of the British media and even the whole of its society. The once-powerful British Empire must now resort to such trickery to manifest its pride.

Anyone with a common sense of diplomacy understands fine-tuning of itinerary details are a necessity in high-level state visits. It is completely normal and proper for the Chinese Premier to meet with the British Queen, who should make her own contribution to the success of this diplomatic event. The British media are unprofessional by speculating over the negotiation process.

For China, Premier Li's final travel itinerary is in full conformity with the significance of his visit. Designing such an agenda was quite simple for Beijing. It is London that conceives they could utilize different options to express its opinions. However, China will pay no heed to all this.

British public opinion remains prejudiced against China and highly expects to embrace an opportunity to prove that it is superior compared with the emerging nation. Nevertheless, engaging in economic cooperation with Beijing is in its practical interests. Whenever Chinese and British leaders meet with each other, the British media habitually hypes China's human rights and calls on the British government not to sell its soul in exchange for Beijing's trade pacts.

Britain's national strength cannot be placed in the same rank as China now, a truth difficult to accept for some Britons who want to stress their nobility. If they refuse to recognize this fact and find fault with China on purpose, even at the cost of bilateral relations, they will not find any mental comfort. Chinese society is more and more relaxed in dealing with Sino-UK ties, while the British could not be pettier.

The Chinese public has a simple attitude toward the China-UK relationship in which national interests are the decisive factor. As an important European country, a positive bilateral relationship outweighs a negative one. There is no extra sentiment involved. But to us, British society attaches much more emotion when it comes to engagement with China, such as sense of pride and national dignity.

Perhaps Chinese people should forgive Britain's confusing sentiment. A rising country should understand the embarrassment of an old declining empire and at times the eccentric acts it takes to hide such embarrassment. Diplomacy has to be based on realistic recognition of the two countries' power. No matter for China or the UK, it will be tiring if they try to distort this reality.

Source:Global Times Published: 2014-6-18

Rightways