Newspaper websites suffer post-Olympic dip as print sales hold steady

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/oct/20/newspaper-website-print-sales

This article looks into the decline that print media in the form of newspapers would have as well as its online counterpart.

• "The best digital performer, relatively speaking, was the Sun which saw daily average browser numbers drop by just 1.52% month on month to 2.9 million, according to the latest figures from the Audit Bureau of Circulations published on Thursday."
• "Mail Online saw its daily unique browser numbers fall by by 3.2% month on month in September"

In my opinion I think that this decline is mainly due to the online variation of newspapers. In this case there have been dips in the performance of these newspapers. In this case I think that this highlights the transition to digital versions of newspapers. However as previously discussed in previous tasks, this would be quite a negative impact because of the efforts of journalism. In this case there isn't much investigative journalism that there was for newspapers to survive. However there can be an argument that online would normally report on these revealing events such as the dark aspects of each Presidential Candidate on the Presidential Race. This would tend to be trending. Especially considering that the final debate was approaching soon. So therefore there is potential for journalism.

'Social media can be a pretty ugly place if you're a woman in politics'

Source:https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2016/oct/21/female-politicians-social-media-abuse-european-parliament

Social media can be a place for politicians to express their opinions and promote their opinions to the wide masses. However there can be some backlash considering that social media would welcome freedom of speech. Therefore although they can interact with the public, there will be those who just want to bully  and online is no exception.

• Globally, only 22.8% of national members of parliament are women, and there are still 38 countries in which more than 90% of MPs are men.

In my opinion, I think that this just shows that social media is one of the biggest hosts for opinions. Places like twitter where people can voice their opinion can also be countered with harmful and hateful comments. 

NDM News: The future of journalism

1) Accountability journalism is important because it has the potential to expose the corruption of institutions. In this case it would look into how the press are responsible for possibly damaging the image of a brand by revealing what is happening behind the scenes. The example that was stated was the Boston Globe receiving content that had showed that Father John Geoghan had been a paedophile and has had over 100 victims in his care.

2) The relation between both advertisers and newspapers would be that big newspapers would be the place that advertisers are willing promote in. One of the demotivating things that advertisers would face are the huge costs that would come with promoting in newspapers as the 20th Century was still a time when newspapers were the main source of content. The websites that he mention would be websites such as Craigslist and Monster and Match since they would tailor their adverts much more to the expected audience.

3) He suggests that the way that an audience gains their audience is not from the actual institution but rather the audience. This would be because they would tweet about it. This would mean that now news corporations would have to make sure that audiences are sharing the content online so that they could attract more digital readers. However this does lead to a divide in audience. As some may want their news as a print, others may much prefer the online variation. This would meanly be because it is free, and would also offer stories from a variety of genres. By genres i mean categories such as Political News, Technology News and many more. Since this would categorise the news in a way that audiences can read what they are interested in, this would make it more tailored to them in comparison to the newspaper which tries to include categories that may not intrigue their audience however they deemed it more important.

4) If the internet had wide spread in 1992, then this would mean that the audience could have easily gained access to the story. This would be because of people sharing the story to many people to the extent that it would get trending. This would mean that it would've been widely talked about. As well as that, since an audience would've showed interest to this story, there is likely going to be news channels trying to report in on the story.

5) The main argument against the paywall seems to be how it would inform the audience. In this case since the paywall wouldn't interest an audience into reading online, this would mean that they wouldn't be informed. As well as that the way distribution of the news has changed since the 20th Century which means that online would be a good method to share stories. However I think that if there is a paywall, there would be less online readers since they have grown accustomed to reading free news.

6) Journalism is a "public good" because of how it is offered online. They are willing to create this content for the audience to access. Especially digitally since it has made reporting stories a lot easier. This would mainly be because of the lower costs in comparison to the past. 

7) He thinks that newspapers aren't replaceable. Although the decline in accountability journalism has declined. This is something that needs to be addressed as this would mean that there should be 5% of accountability journalism. It shouldn't be held by big institutions and so this should expand so that a variety of sources.

8) I think it is because of the advertisements that would surround their website. Since ad revenue appears to be their primary source of income, it could explain how they would survive. As well as that since the adverts would be tailored to its audience, this would help the online news distribution better. However there is the print newspaper which is declining and is considered a costly platform in comparison to the low cost that online would be. 

Newspapers: the effect of online technology

1) In my opinion I partly disagree. For starters the main reason I would disagree would be accessibility. In this case the news should be a very accessible source of information so that the audience are informed. This would be because if they would need to know what it happening in their local area, they can just read what is happening. Having a paywall restricts the amount of people who read the stories that the BBC produce. In this case there has been the different sorts of places that might also look into it. However the contrary to this argument of whether it should be paid for is that being informed should be something that an audience is willing to pay for. This would be because of decline of newspapers as they transition to digital media. in this case journalism isn't as rewarding as it used to be. Therefore paying for a news service could also help with journalism as it could increase the amount of journalism since this is lowering over time. I think that it should be paid for. Although people may not be willing to pay the BBC for something that was offered for free for many years, they may see this as a cash grab.

2) Rupert Murdoch may be right in having to have his content behind a paywall. This would be because it presents that there are people willing to subscribe to digital news. From this it could also try and recover from the financial losses that they have made with still distributing newspapers. Although this might also help financially, this would also look into how there might be a decrease in the online readers.

3) Favour - "What the management of MailOnline have done is show that the free model might just work ever so slightly, but probably not in a robust, profitable way. What News UK have shown is that they can move over paying customers, and keep a healthy ratio of decent content to preserve the brand equity."

I partially agree with this statement as this looks to take the business perspective of the subscription programme. I partially agree because it does have a valid point of potentially working. Although I disagree as it just talks about the free model.

Against - "It is so ridiculous if these mainstream newspapers believe that they can "force readership of fee-based news. One can get the same "news" for free almost anywhere on the internet. I'd take a hint from the alternative free weeklies that survive just off their local advertising. I don't think anyone would read them otherwise. These papers are full of paid advertising. The fee model will never work.
Jerry Harris"

In my opinion my agree with this comment because it focus on how free content would transition behind a paywall. This does take the perspective of someone who seems to understand an audience who don't like paywalls.

4) The main reason why The Evening Standard would be the anomaly in this case wold be because of the customers that are willing to pay for the service that they offer. In this case since the Evening Standard is available through print, the increase in distribution which would also make it more accessible to its customers.

5) In my opinion, I think that the print platform will eventually die out. This would mainly be because of how it isn't as rewarding as it would be. In this case there would be media outlets such as the internet which has made the news free for everyone to access. Since it is free people wouldn't be willing to pay for the service since they are so used to it being offered for free. However if there is a paywall, there could be a negative backlash for the distributors of the digital news content since they might be considered "money greedy". However this could also financially help them since they might have a strong readership that are willing to subscribe to their content.

NDM Stories Index

#1 Broadcasters warned against using children's photographs from social media sites
#2 Facebook and Twitter join coalition to improve social media newsgathering
#3 Meet Snapchat's 'dudeocracy' of talent
#4 BBC Radio 1 aims to be 'Netflix of music radio' with phone-first strategy
#5 Rinstagram or Finstagram? The curious duality of the modern Instagram user
#6 Facebook inflated video viewing times for two years
#7 Twitter pays £1.24m in UK tax as revenues increase by 30.5%
#8 Ad-blockers: are publishers tempted to feed the hand that bites them?
#9 I'm with you on the digital revolution, it's the lack of journalism I can't face
#10 Trump's groping boasts inspire thousands of women to share sexual assault stories on Twitter
#11 Social media can be a pretty ugly place if you're a woman in politics
#12 Newspaper websites suffer post-Olympic dip as print sales hold steady
#13 Local newspaper content too full of listicles and clickbait - lecturer
#14 Lessons to be learned as the Buenos Aires Herald goes weekly
#15 The new social: brands are embracing private sharing
#16 Invasion of the troll armies: from Russian Trump supporters to Turkish state stooges
#17 Facebook faces calls for greater transparency amid 'fake news' row
#18 Twitter suspends American far-right activists' accounts
#19 Fake news clampdown: Google gives €150,000 to fact-checking projects
#20 Platforms v creators: the battle for the internet economy

Trump's groping boasts inspire thousands of women to share sexual assault stories on Twitter

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/09/women-share-sexual-assault-stories-on-twitter-after-donald-trump-comments

Twitter account @kellyoxford has had recent popularity as she has started a movement for women to share their abuse stories in relation to the recent Trump groping boasts. This has led to more people sharing their stories and potential negative backlash on the Republican Party.

•  13,786 13,786 Retweets   
• 19,407 19,407 likes

In my opinion, I think this can try and make women more open about their experiences which can highlight the faults that have occurred. However it is a shame that it takes recent controversial events to try and make people open about their experience.

I'm with you on the digital revolution, it's the lack of journalism I can't face

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/oct/11/im-with-you-on-the-digital-revolution-its-the-lack-of-journalism-i-cant-face

This story looks into how the newspaper is a dying platform. This also looks into how social media isn't really journalism as it would just react and report from other sources.

In my opinion, I would agree with this statement as social media is just an easier platform for people to access the news. However there isn't much journalism as newspapers are now being credited in the article. This isn't rewarding for the actual journalists wouldn't be rewarded for their reporting in comparison to those who share the story on social media.

Ad-blockers: are publishers tempted to feed the hand that bites them?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2016/oct/04/adblock-plus-publishers-tempted-feed-hand-bites

This article looks into how Eyeo have decided to implement a new advertising system which would only allow whitelisted adverts to be displayed. This does mean that it might go against its original use which is to block ads for its users.

• The industry remains hugely sceptical. Adblock Plus says it has over 1,000 publishers on board
• However, only about 8%–10% of our users choose to block them (Adverts) all. 

In my opinion, I think this is a good idea. This is because it would ensure that online companies are getting online advertising revenue. As well as that, since they would display adverts that Adblock users would whitelist, then this could promote businesses to make more appropriate and "acceptable" adverts be displayed for those who use it.

Twitter pays £1.24m in UK tax as revenues increase by 30.5%

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/03/twitter-uk-tax-revenues-staff-shares-2015-results

Twitter now has to pay more tax because of the revenue that it has accumulated over time. However, they have been criticised in the past for locating in Ireland to avoid tax. However, they have said that they pay the tax that the 163 staff members in the UK.  

• Twitter UK’s 163 staff get £12.5m in shares as company reports revenues of £76m last year, but analysts say figure is much higher
• Twitter UK made a £3.36m pre-tax profit last year, up from £3.29m in 2014.

In my opinion, I think that this does highlight twitters success. Especially considering that their revenues have increased this is a good thing from a financial standpoint. However, the criticism about Ireland does seem suspicious however it is good to see that Twitter does pay the tax that the 163 staff members have been taxed.

NDM: The decline of the newspaper industry

The future of newspapers

This article would mainly talk about how newspapers are a medium that is going into decline. It has been predicted that newspapers might die in 2043. By die, I mean that there wouldn't be many newspapers readers as there are now. This would mean that Newspapers might not be sold in stores as they would. And this would also mean that all newspapers would transition to online exclusives instead. This could lose some jobs for journalists that had worked on the print format which would mean that it has a negative impact would be placed with the transition. 

1) In my opinion, I would agree with this statement. This would be because of how accessible the internet is. People won't have to pay to read about the news as this would be the benefits as to why customers would want to read online. Although there have been moments where newspaper audiences might get a small gift from purchasing a newspaper such as a small buildable set that parents might be interested in purchasing for their children, this still hasn't done much to prevent the decline of the newspapers. This could be because of the accessibility of the internet. This would mean that newspapers should try and either transition onto an online only service, or try and cover up something controversial through investigative reporting that might entice an audience into reading. However, this could also backfire as online sources of news could also talk about the same topic but only reference the newspaper that the story was included in. This would be less favourable to those who are also doing print as the exclusivity of the story would be compromised as it would be more accessible to those who want to read it online.


News Lego Promotion: http://www.brickshow.tv/news/2016/04/first-look-on-some-of-legos-2016-daily-mail-promotional-giveaways/ 

2) The writer's opinions, although 10 years old, are very valid. This would be because of the decline in readers. The OFCOM 2015 report has stated that a number of newspapers readers who would have decreased by 27% from 2005 to 2014. This would mean that the newspapers would be in decline over time. Especially considering that it has gone down to 27% as this would, therefore, mean that there could be some truth to the statement about the decline in 2043. As well as that, the OFCOM reports have looked into the platforms for where an audience would gain their news from. and 2% only using newspapers. This can also show how newspapers are a less preferred option as it would also show that newspapers are also being neglected by the majority who would use other platforms such as TV which is another arguably dying platform. 

3) For starters, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that supports whether there is a non-profit organisation that is supporting journalists as this might not have been reported by big outlets. However, through further digging, there is an organisation known as 

The Guardian is funded by The Scott Trust which is the organisation that would financially fund it. This would be because of the ownership that the Scott Trust would have. The profits that they would earn are reinvested into journalism.

Investigative journalism has changed over time as it has introduced ways of gaining information. Especially considering that the Panama Papers was considered the biggest leak, this would mean that they can now report on content that can now expose what big corporations are hiding from the public. As well as that there is also the fact that big corporations would now need to be considerate on what they would do. Since journalists can now use leaks as a way to highlight corruption, this has changed the way that they would investigate stories. Now that anonymous sources would leak information to journalists to report. This would now change the sources that they would gain.

Build a wall

1) Section 1: This section talks about how the audience should pay for the news as they would give a service to the audience by informing them rather just neglecting the newspapers and just reading them for free online. 

Section 2: This section talks about how newspapers should embrace a new payment system. In this case, the news journalists that would be paid aren't as much they should be. This would be because of the competition that online can offer. And there are only two American newspapers that are publishing. These two would be The Washington Post and The New York Times.

Section 3: Talks about the changes that the newspaper would face. This would be competition such as TV and online over time. Subscriptions for the online platform can help with the funding of these sources. The moments that made newspapers the highlight would now change because of the fact that online might get to it first.

Section 4: This section mainly highlight the possible ways that online would proceed after newspapers would go down. On of the ways would be by offering an affordable subscription service that would entice an audience into paying for the news service. However, the alternate would be the introduction of subscription news.

2) In summary, this article talks about how the newspaper industry is in decline. This would be because of how there are websites online that would offer the story for readers to freely read. This has, therefore, lead to the discussion that online news institutions should offer subscriptions so that people don't just freely read the news without paying for a service that journalists would offer their services to. This also talks about how the news has the potential to be strong as there were events that have occurred which have given them a strong following with a big amount of readers.

3) This article talks about the freedom of speech that an audience online would have. This would be people such as bloggers who can express their opinion on news stories. And since it has been made a lot easier with the comments sections, people can have their say about the topic and it can be publically viewed by many.

4) In my opinion, I think that online news should be put behind a paywall. This would be because the news should be something that people are willing to pay for. Journalists shouldn't feel that their efforts were wasted because they wouldn't get anything back from the audience besides the regular share of the story. The paywall can be seen as a good thing as it could also keep with good income for the journalists as adverts won't just be their only source of income. There may not be as many journalists if we consumers aren't willing to present a passion for this sort of content which is seen as important. Especially those who go investigating in the scene, their trips would be wasted as their consumers aren't willing to pay.

However, the counter argument to this is that the paywall still shouldn't exist because we as an audience have grown accustomed to not paying subscriptions to read about the news. This would be because the audience is used to the freedoms that the internet would offer. And it is because of this freedom that many people would transition to digital media just to read the news since it would be more accessible t them. Including a paywall would be like restricting access to the news. This would be because people who may not have good income may not afford it. So, therefore, they would rely on the freedom of digital news.

In conclusion, I would side with not having the paywall. This would be because many audiences wouldn't want online news if they were then told that they should pay for it. This may decrease in readers as they might change their source of news.