newspaper masthead desecration

Image from @craigthomler at Twitter.

The deeply discounted home delivery and digital access offer from News Corp and Nine Media has been pitched for ages, years it feels like. A couple of shoppers this weekend expressed doubt that the deal for The Age will really end. meanwhile, they continue to try and take shoppers from retail newsagents.

In February this year, in support of professional journalism, I subscribes to the Washington Post, the New York Times and The Age. I wrote about it here and here.

In the wake of the news Wednesday that Fairfax is cutting editorial staff by 25%, I wonder if the subscription for The Age is a good move. I signed on as a subscriber to support quality independent journalism. I feel dudded. Fairfax titles already struggle because of limited journalist resources. The 25% cut will hit hard.

What is a trusted newspaper if it does not have journalists creating the product at the core of the business? As Mark Day wrote in The Australian yesterday:

Fairfax says it intends to use more contributors to fill its column­s, but it intends to pay them less. It is a recipe for disaster, for if a publishing company cannot­ offer journalistic quality, it has nothing to offer. You can’t keep cutting the core of the business because, soon, there will be no business left.

I get it that Fairfax is in a tough situation. All print media is. My outsider view is that the company should have sought savings by cutting print editions. I expect they are losing money on print at least four days a week. I say that thinking of how thin the papers are some days. It is embarrassing what we charge for what feels like a pamphlet more so than a newspaper.

My thinking is: cut the weekday editions, produce beautiful bumper weekend editions and make money off of print and drive the migration to digital for weekday. Maybe would keep a Wednesday edition but certainly not Monday, Tuesday and Thursday. Make Friday a Friday / Saturday newspaper.

Cutting loss making print editions should mean the company is better resourced to create the journalism that is its differentiator. Or am I missing something here?

The other move I’d make is to deliver a digital experience that is best-practice. Currently from fair fax it is far from best practice. As a subscriber to the Washington Post I am enjoying a terrific online news experience that also provides access to quality journalism. The digital experience itself is key, especially on a pone as I suspect the majority of news site accesses are from a phone or mobile device.

The Washington Post tech and design team have produced a platform that makes me happy to pay for access, for the experience. Their investment in quality journalism reminds me my subscription is a good investment. This is what Fairfax needs to provide. Right now, their online experience gives me too much clickbait and a browsing experience that is not ideal for the iPhone.

Cutting editorial staff at Fairfax right now does not make sense to me, not this round. Hopefully, we see The Guardian, BuzzFeed, HuffPost in Australia and others fill the gap with quality journalism as Fairfax management appears disinterested their core differentiator.

Footnote: I am serious is asking the question. It is what I first thought when I heard the news of Fairfax cutting 25% of editorial staff.