The New York Times Is Now Supported by Readers, Not Advertisers
At the company’s big three papers — the New York Times, International Herald Tribune, and Boston Globe — print and digital ad dollars dipped 6.6 percent to $220 million, while circulation revenue was up 8.3 percent to $233 million. The historical rebalancing may indicate a sea change in an industry that has long relied on advertising to stay afloat.
An interesting fact all by itself. Sending my mind along multiple future paths for the newspaper. Will readership shrink as it goes from free to paid? Can it still be the paper of record if it’s behind a paywall? Are they just forcing freeloading readers to go elsewhere?
It did send me to the Los Angeles Times, San Diego Union-Tribune, and, ironically, to social media for alternate news sources.
Though, I do have a bone to pick with one of the closing statements in the article, “…no longer depend on ad revenue, but must rely more than ever on the whims of the customer.”
I would have thought being free of advertisers to be a positive move. Is this a ‘thing’ in the newspaper industry that readers are so whimsical?
And, why does the New York media always have to insult its readers?
