Annual State-of-the Media report

The annual "The State of the American News Media" report, released Mar. 13, declares that while 2004 was a bad year for the newspaper industry, with circulation and advertising declines, "2005 was about three times worse." It also asserts that at many old media companies "the decades-long battle at the top between idealists and accountants is now over. The idealists have lost. The troubles of 2005, especially in print, dealt a further blow to this fight for journalism in the public interest." The report quotes an editor of a major paper: "If you argue about public trust today, you will be dismissed as an obstructionist and a romantic." In a surprising finding, the report states that the audience for online news appears to have leveled off. The growth now is not in how many people get news online, "but how often they do so." The 700-page report, from the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ), reveals that newspapers are expected to have lost about 1,500 jobs in 2005. That represents a drop of about 3,800 jobs, or about seven percent since 2000. Since 1990, circulation will have fallen nearly 15 percent or more than nine million, on weekdays. Yet the report concludes that "any idea that newspapers have turned a corner and are on a rapid course to extinction seems overheated. The circulation declines and job cuts will probably tally at only about three percent for the year. The industry will still post profit margins of 20 percent. And if one combines print and online, the readership of many newspapers is higher than ever." The report also looks in-depth at television, online, blogs, radio and cable. "The variety of news sources available today makes relying on a single outlet seem like an outdated idea," Project Director Tom Rosenstiel said. "But consumers need to be careful about where they go and even when. Stories come and go fast and getting a comprehensive picture of the news can be difficult." The big question, the report poses, is how long will it take online to get to an economic model that rivals the old media in revenues. "In the meantime, American newsrooms, already shrinking, may no longer be able to cover the waterfront," it warns. Among other findings, as described by PEJ: *The new paradox of journalism is more outlets are covering fewer stories. As the number of news outlets grows, generally the audiences of each one shrinks, and news organizations cut back on resources. Yet they still all have to cover the big stories. Thus on most major events, we have more reporters, but fewer stories are being covered generally. A close look at the big news websites even demonstrates it. Google News offers access within two clicks to 14,000 stories, but really they are accounts of just 24 news events. *Among newspapers, big city metros appear to be suffering the biggest circulation declines and newsroom cutbacks. The three national newspapers and smaller papers are faring better. These big papers are caught between people having access to national and international sources at one end, and more niche publications on the other. Yet our content studies suggest the big metros are the news organizations most likely to have the resources and aspirations to act as watchdog over state, regional and urban institutions, to identify trends, and to define the larger community public square. It is unlikely small suburban dailies or weeklies will take up that challenge. "In the last year, the changes in media have intensified, and the problems for print have accelerated," said Rosenstiel. "Yet it's probably glib and even naïve to say simply that more platforms equal more choices. The content has to come from somewhere, and as older news gathering media decline, some of the strengths they offer in monitoring the powerful and verifying the facts may be weakening as well."