Yesterday's victory by Barak Obama has created a huge surge in demand for printed newspapers. Jim Romenesko at Poynter Institute has been keeping tabs on stories of newspapers across the country selling out of their editions today:
Papers rush to meet newsstand demand:
Chicago’s two major daily newspapers quickly sold out their larger-than-normal print runs of Wednesday editions, prompting each to churn out even more copies... “We knew this would be an incredible issue,” said a spokesman for the Chicago Tribune, which printed 220,000 more copies than normal.
At the Washington Post, Print Journalism Lives!!!:
I heard that we're printing 250,000 copies of it. [Update: K-wey says they're increasing the run to 350,000.] The line stretches from the entrance all the way up the block, to M Street, and then hangs a left onto M. Post employees are allowed one copy each, which they're picking up in the lobby.
USA Today printed 380,000 additional copies of the newspaper and ran out:
Reuters MediaFile has a round up of others:USA Today printed 380,000 additional copies of the newspaper for Nov 5, totaling 2.8 million copies nationally. We've received word that USA Today is sold out across the country and in response we are printing an overrun to be available for purchase at electionedition.usatoday.com. An image version of the front page will also be available for download at electionfront.usatoday.com.
This forum posting at Poynter Forums from Baltimore Sun editor provides some perspective:The New York Times is printing an extra 50,000 copies of today’s paper for the local market after completely selling out, according to spokeswoman Catherine Mathis...
A colleague in the ad department has an acquaintance who is a city bus driver. She called him this morning to report that a "great many" people were boarding buses this morning with copies of The Sun. And, many of them had a special name for today's edition. They called it "the history paper," and referred to our extensive coverage of the election.
Today's newspaper buying spree is a testament of our cultural connection with print. This does not indicate newspapers will continue to be a relevant method of disseminating information. People are buying copies today, not to read, but to save it as a relic to show their grand children. A physical object to remind them of this very special and historic day.
Discussion
By Michel Jahn on Nov 06, 2008
Funny thing how many tend to want to save a 'snap shot' of some important moment in history.
I think I may still have copies of the moon landing and JFK assassination in some box somewhere - both as copies of my local paper - the "Buffalo Evening News" - now the Buffalo news, with a very healthy web site -- I just discovered, this newspaper site is tricked out with videos from AP, a community site, blogs, photos - if only they could FTP Chicken Wings and Roast Beef on Weck...)
I may be wrong, but my guess is that most of the people in line are unfamiliar with the idea that they could visit their local newspaper web site and "print to PDF" - and save that.
I did that very thing on on April 1st 2008. I took the time to "print to PDF" the magazine section of my subscription to the New York Times. I no longer get the physical analog version delivered, but read it every morning, even when I travel - as a web page.
I share this with you as today, as reading this post by Adam (always thought provoking Adam, thanks!) -- I wondered "gee, is that article I thought so very important still up on the net?"
The answer was "of course"
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/magazine/01axelrod.t.html
and I could-re-read it faster than finding that PDF created, and certainly faster than trying to find the 1963 and 1969 paper documents, now probably faded and brittle.
*sigh* - Adam is spot on, once again. The physical version is not as useful as the digital version I am afraid.
Moreover - why would I bother even looking when I can get a much better in depth description of an event such as these here;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination
and here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing
Michael Jahn
Slightly use PDF Evangelist
IQColour.com
By Rick Littrell on Nov 07, 2008
This article is "spot on". I agree with your observation. I am one of them that save a newspaper when there is a significant event, such as this election...or, Patriots winning the Super Bowl...or, US invasion of Iraq. There is the permanence to the paper. I would save a web page, if I could be sure that it would be there in the years to come, which I don't think it well. That shows the fleeting nature of the internet. Gets the news/info to you quicker, but then moves on! I guess that reflects on how our society is evolving. Since there is SO MUCH information that we have access to, I just want what I want when I want it. I also posted on the Magicomm blog my thoughts on the status of the newspaper industry. Check it out if you are interested. http://twurl.nl/0libsi
By Michael Josefowicz on Nov 08, 2008
To get and consume information, the web wins. But the physical object saves that information in a way the net doesn't. It's why people collect things.
But the bigger advantage of paper is that it enables "compare and contrast", which is the operational definition of learning. Comparing and contrasting is very hard on the web, but very easy with a print version and a pencil or highlighter.
Maybe as we are being forced to move from a "consumer" society to a "saving and producing" society, print will re discover it's unique sustainable advantage.
If anyone is interested in a possible business case for this approach, I posted it over at Magicom.
http://www.magicomm.biz/blog/are-newspapers-dead#comment-662
By Rick Littrell on Nov 08, 2008
Great comments by both Michael's. Using the physical paper for storage could begin to decline. Not everyone can 'print to pdf", but they can "save page as" in the browser. Then if they really get creative, you can use 'cloud computing" to store the file on your web site, with you comments, to share with you friends. It then gets into the whole "social media" thing, where if we can share want we think is important (or fun, or necessary, or...) with those that have common interests, friends, and relatives, that could be what ends up reducing the importance of using paper as a "storage" medium. I'm not completely there yet, but definitely moving in that direction.
So, much to think about, so little time to do it.
See Ya'll later,
Rick
By Michael Josefowicz on Nov 08, 2008
Just wanted to re emphasize the importance of Print as a learning tool. Reading on the web is a bit like reading a 12" wide scroll. It's also a bit like looking backward in a speeding train.
With Print it's much easier to do a "close reading".
Here's what I mean from the POV of the learner.
Something sounds interesting, it gets highlighted. Then something else sounds interesting, and it gets highlighted.
Then the "mulling". That's the time when new connections are made in the head. And when "evaluation" takes place. Flip back. Flip forward. Check out the index. Scan the other headlines. If you're lucky, the learning act occurs.
Compare and contrast.
By Loretta Puckrin on Nov 10, 2008
When you rely on the internet you are giving control of your input to someone else- you are relying on what someone has decided to save and at times that information has been 'updated' to reflect current changes. As an avid reader of books published in the 1800s I see a distinct shift in the perception of what has happened in major world events. I am not naive enough to believe that what I read is what has actually happened - it all has been filtered through the need to entice people and make money - but by reading the original, unaltered (as in publication copies you have saved) and and then comparing it to the information available on the internet you will get a better idea of the shift society has taken.
By Michel Jahn on Nov 12, 2008
Yes indeed Loretta, history shows that they used to get it right in the 1800, where the writer was always, well, the writer and may (or may not) be sharing the facts (as they see it anyway)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-chicagodays-deweydefeats-story,0,6484067.story
okay, that was a honest mistake (smile) - but as someone who shares and interest in "What they Thought " - I offer - Ray Raphael - Founding Myths: Stories that Hide our Patriotic Past..
http://hnn.us/articles/7219.html
a great example of why we SHOULD save a copy of the news, as they will always "spin" it later!
By Michael Josefowicz on Nov 14, 2008
Mike,
Great link to HNN!
The thing is textbooks are dog food products. The people who pay for them, don't use them. The myths are easy to remember and repeat, and keep the school boards safe from criticism.
Meanwhile, they are very expensive to produce and expensive to buy. Don't you think that as school boards are going to be forced to everything better, cheaper faster, sooner, rather than later, textbooks will be replaced?
How about ultra short run newspapers or paperbacks, informed by the latest scholarship, versioned for particular schools?
Technically it's a no brainer. Best copy from the web, brought into classrooms in Print. If anyone knows a school district that might like to try it, please get in touch. I've been on this particular soapbox for about 4 years, and have a feeling that all the pieces are falling into place.
By Hal Kohn on Nov 15, 2008
"why would I bother even looking when I can get a much better in depth description of an event such as these here;"...which goes on to wikipedia, etc....
I say...
Because when you do not have electricity, you can always burn the paper to get light and heat.
Try that with your non bio-degradable hi tech wizardry....
By Michael Josefowicz on Nov 15, 2008
Given that most people in the world don't have electricity, it sounds like a growth market to me:
Ever try to share a story with someone on the computer?
By Mark Turk on Nov 18, 2008
Very profound observation about “…our cultural connection with print.” I was all set to commend you until I read the remainder of your comments. People are buying copies of newspapers "not to read?" How absurd. If this is even remotely true, we as a democracy are in worse shape than I thought with regard to reading from credible news sources. Your supposed "spot-on" commentary on this subject may apply to some, but as a printing industry advocate(!?), I would think you would give any legitimate successful ink-on-paper venture a more deserving optimistic viewpoint and outlook. Radio, television, computers and now the internet "blog" were/are all supposed to kill the newspaper industry. As a print-produced saleable product, the newspaper is still with us. Granted, circulation numbers are plummeting in many places and you make a good point—printed newspapers are indeed the only way to physically capture historic events for future use. However, I have yet to find any medium which contains the amount of local, national and international CREDIBLE news than that of a newspaper. I refer you to an article published in the October 26, 2008 edition Hartford Courant PRINTED NEWSPAPER, which might lend some support to my position that newspapers are and will continue to be a relevant and vital source of information:
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/commentary/hc-commentarykopman1026.artoct26,0,4081921.story" rel="nofollow">A Sinking Feeeling: How The Decline Of Newspapers Threatens Democracy
[Editor's Note Mark include the full text of the newspaper story. I changed it to article link.]
By Adam Dewitz on Nov 18, 2008
@Mark. So people stood in long lines to buy the Nov 5th edition to read news that was more then 15 hours old? - I doubt it. People wanted something to collect.
My point is this temporary rush to buy newspapers wasn't an indication of a newspaper renaissance.
Newspapers (the organization) will continue to be relevant. I never said they wouldn't. I don't think we can say the same about their current distribution method (mass produced print).
By Michael Josefowicz on Nov 18, 2008
Sorry Mark,
I don't buy it. We agree that print newspapers will be with us a very long time.
But when you say "However, I have yet to find any medium which contains the amount of local, national and international CREDIBLE news than that of a newspaper." We have to part company.
Where we our wonderful journalists at the run up to the War in Iraq. Judith Miller did her part. Not journalism's finest hour. And where have they all been for the last 8 years, as our public discourse descended into silliness? Starting with Monica Lewinsky and continuing since then.
in 1907 Joseph Pulitzer published the following,
"[My newspaper] will always fight for progress and reform, never tolerate injustice or corruption, always fight demagogues of all parties, never lack sympathy for the poor, always remain devoted to the public welfare, never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by predatory plutocracy of predatory poverty."
The problem with newspapers is not the internet or the customer. It's a General Motors problem. My take is that it's a Pogo situation, "we have met the enemy, and he is us."
Discussion
Join the discussion Sign In or Become a Member, doing so is simple and free