The Vanishing Newspaper: Saving Journalism in the Information Age

by Philip N. Meyer

For more than thirty years the newspaper industry has been losing readers at a slow but steady rate. News professionals are inclined to blame themselves, but the real culprit is technology and its competing demands on the public's time. The Internet is just the latest in a long series of new information technologies that have scattered the mass audience that newspapers once held. By isolating and describing the factors that made journalism work as a business in the past, Meyer provides a model that will make it work with the changing technologies of the present and future. He backs his argument with empirical evidence, supporting key points with statistical assessments of the quality and influence of the journalist's product, as well as its effects on business success.

Genres: Nonfiction, Journalism, History, Classics, Politics

264 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Philip Meyer (October 27, 1930 – November 4, 2023) was an American journalist and scholar who was a professor and holder of the Knight Chair in Journalism at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Reviews

[April Helms · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wasn't sure I was going to finish this one. It's not the book per se. It's well-written, with a lot of good information and takeaways despite its age. But that's the big problem: it was published in 2004, which means that the information itself was most likely written at least 13 years ago. A lot of things have happened since then, rendering large parts of this book moot. The whole third chapter about advertisers can easily be skipped or skimmed. As I said, there are some interesting statistics (although almost certainly dated) and information, but it's fascinating in a way that looking into a time capsule and looking at predictions of the future holds one's interest. I am curious whether the author has come back to this book, or would consider doing so, and doing an update. It did enlighten me a bit on why many newspaper companies have taken the actions they have, and it has a good chapter on the impact of Wall Street on the newspaper business (really, the news business in general). But the ultimate lesson learned- I will try to remember, with a book like this, to check the publication date. Had I realized it was so old, I would have left it on the shelf.

[Darinda · Rating 3 out of 5]

A look into the world of newspaper publishing. Lots of statistics and some interesting insight into journalism. This book is a little dated - written in 2004, read in 2018.

[Pascal Lapointe]

Un gros, très gros effort, pour mesurer ce qui semble impossible à mesurer : la crédibilité d’un journal. Si ses propriétaires choisissent de couper dans les budgets, comme ils le font presque tous depuis 20 à 30 ans, en-dessous de quel seuil la crédibilité du média sera-t-elle irrémédiablement endommagée?

La revue que fait Meyer des multiples études —nées du moment où, au tournant des anneés 1980, les éditeurs ont commencé à se rendre compte qu’ils avaient VRAIMENT un problème— est des plus révélatrices : l'accumulation de ces études, souvent très imaginatives, démontre mieux qu'un long discours combien il serait difficile de convaincre un propriétaire qui ne pense qu'en terme de relevés trimestriels.

En fait, pour les médias traditionnels, il est probablement trop tard. Quelque part entre 1980 et aujourd’hui, ils sont passés de l’autre côté du miroir : ils ont irrémédiablement endommagé leur crédibilité, même auprès des lecteurs les plus fidèles. Mais pour les nouveaux médias, ou pour quoi que ce soit qui constituera les héritiers des journaux sur Internet, rien n’est perdu. Si leurs éditeurs et propriétaires sont capables de viser un horizon de plusieurs années. Et si les journalistes, autant les « pros » que les « citoyens », sont capables de se doter, eux aussi, d’une crédibilité nouvelle, adaptée à cette époque où n’importe qui peut être journaliste.

[Leonardo Fontes · Rating 4 out of 5]

As propostas de Philip Meyer, em The Vanishing Newspaper, para salvar a indústria do jornalismo impresso são fundamentadas por pesquisas detalhadas, farto material estatístico e aplicação direta de técnicas das ciências sociais para identificar tendências ratificadoras de que investir em qualidade de conteúdo é a única saída lucrativa para o negócio.

Para Meyer, os jornais americanos, em nome das respostas de curto prazo exigidas pelo mercado financeiro, têm perdido a visão de longo prazo necessária para a consolidação da influência de marcas nas comunidades em que atuam e que, ao abandonar seu ideal ético e de serviço para a sociedade, eles sofrerão a derrocada definitiva da papel.

As conclusões do livro podem parecer óbvias, mas o mérito do autor está no grande número de informações supostamente sólidas (lembrem-se, estatísticas podem ser manipuladas), analisadas pelos mais experientes profissionais do jornalismo americano.

O cenário é bem diverso do brasileiro e dos países em desenvolvimento, mas ainda assim, grande leitura.

[Whitebeard Books · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not only has the newspaper industry declined steadily, I'm convinced that all print media is in the same basket. People have less time and video is faster. With the latest apps, we can have a television and a PC on our cellphone. Add to this change in habits the simple practical fact that those majoring in journalism today are preparing for a career in a digital format, leaving no one trained in the old style of newspaper reporting. The research is different, the results are different and the delivery is different. I fully believe that within the next 30 years there will be no printed magazines, or newspapers. It will all be available in, and ONLY in, a convenient carry along digital format.

[Emily · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was DENSE. If I had realized how niche this book was I might not have read it. I was expecting a broad overview of how the importance of newspapers has diminished in the face of new technology like broadcast TV and the Internet. That was in here, but it was only a small part of this book that was bulging with detailed case studies and statistics about the success and failure of a variety of newspaper franchises.
This is definitely written with an audience of journalists in mind, but it was fascinating getting an insider's perspective on the industry even if I did n't understand everything in it. I learned way more than I ever knew existed about statistics too! Meyer's overall argument is that, in the face of diminishing readership for newspapers and aggressive competition from new technologies, an effective defense is quality, accuracy, and community trust. He backs these statements up with detailed case studies and statistics. It's fascinating, but unfortunately it is already hopelessly out of date. His arguments for quality, trust, and accuracy are probably more applicable than ever, but he missed out on commentary about the recent divisiveness and polarization of media sources, as well as commentary on innovations that newspapers have made online in more recent years. I was fascinated to read such a detailed book about a subject I had practically no knowledge about, but I would have liked to read one that was written closer to the current date.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

Like the Wire, it's a little out of date now, a little overly hopeful. Definitely constructed by a man with an agenda. But it's persuasive and could be of use in building something that will last or finding places that will. Also, it's novel to see some actual social science put to use instead of the constant bullshitting from NAA/SPJ/Poynter etc.

[AH · Rating 3 out of 5]

With fake news prevailing like moral police in Iran, I think books like this are needed now more than ever. I love the chapters on "credibility" and "do editors matter" and also how money making has changed. ُsome works have been done but mostly they have focused on providing alternative channels like democracy now and the real docus should be on social media and a new way for online credibility.

[mike · Rating 2 out of 5]

Some good points in here but overall, far too many statistics, and far too many places in which it seems that those statistics might have been manipulated to get the desired result.

[Joe Miller · Rating 2 out of 5]

Dry as dirt.