by Paul Haslam
17. September 2010 10:19

As the world turned increasingly digital, predictions of the imminent demise of newspapers and books, to be superseded by electronic versions, became so ubiquitous that they sort of began to lose their impact. OK, so we can get Guardian Twitter updates every couple of minutes, but the Belfast Telegraph can still be bought at every major road junction out of the city centre, somebody has to be buying it.
In addition to Sulzberger’s statement, several other factors indicate the likelihood of The New York Times focusing more and more on digital media. Figures released in the past couple of months revealed that the paper’s turnover had increased for the first time in three years owing to a 21 percent increase in revenue from online advertising. Furthermore, there has been a move to develop the international edition of the paper and rebrand as The New York Times Global, indicating a broader online readership.
Going online has obvious advantages but one major drawback: revenue. The New York Times has revealed plans to install a paywall, meaning a fee for unrestricted access but many free articles. As newspapers move into unchartered territory it remains to be seen whether they can attract enough readers, already accustomed to free information online, to subscribe to daily news. Whatever the outcome it is clear that in the news sector, as in music and literature, only the most innovative are likely to survive the dramatic change in how consumers access and share information.
But when the chairman and publisher of the New York Times, Arthur Sulzberger Jr, admits “we will stop printing the New York Times sometime in the future” (editorsweblog), you have to take it seriously. If an iconic media giant like the New York Times cannot compete with the immediacy of electronic publications, what hope is there for smaller publications.