Most major newspapers in Florida and nationwide see declines in new circulation report

It's been a rough couple of weeks for those of us in the newspaper business.

Last week, came reports on third-quarter earnings which showed massive losses for many newspaper companies. In a sign of the media times, an announcement that the New York Times was only going to lose $35-million actually was considered a bit of good news.

Now comes the fall release of figures from the audit bureau of circulations for the six months ending Sept. 2009 which shows steep declines for newspapers across the nation and in Florida. According to Editor and Publisher, in average weekday circulation, the San Francisco Chronicle is down nearly 26 percent, the Newark Star Ledger is down 22 percent and the Miami Herald dropped 23 percent, compared to Sept. 2008.

The St. Petersburg Times saw a 10 percent decline in average weekday circulation from last year, down to 240,147 (Sunday circulation was down 5 percent to 370,050). The number of readers who actually pay for Sunday subscriptions to the Times is up, but overall numbers are down in both categories in part due to the elimination of some free copies delivered to hotels, classrooms, non-7-days-a-week subscribers and other third parties.

The Tampa Tribune was down 18 percent to 152,568 daily; 1 percent decline on Sunday to 252,953.

Overall, circulation for all newspapers in the report dropped 10.6 percent over the past six months, compared to a 7.1 percent drop over the previous six-month period. Analyst Alan Mutter notes these are levels we haven't seen since before World War II; these days, just 12.9 percent of the population buys a daily newspaper (even back then. the lower population meant more than 30 percent of the population bought a paper, Mutter writes.)

As was revealed earlier this month, the Wall Street Journal surpassed USA Today as the top-selling newspaper in America, emerging as the only newspaper among the Top 25 confirmed to not have lost circulation compared to the year before. the Journal gained .65 percent to an average weekday circulation of 2.02-million subscribers (a figure reached by combining the paid print and paid online subscribers).

But for those hoping to argue the Journal's conservative politics may have helped its circulation numbers, other conservative newspapers such as the New York Post (down 18 percent), Chicago Tribune (down 9 percent) and Washington Times (down 17 percent to 67,148) also saw declines.

In Florida, every major newspaper was down, including, in average weekday circulation, the Sun-Sentinel in Ft. Lauderdale (down about 20,000 to 153,563); the Orlando Sentinel, down about 25,000 to 181,090 and Sarasota Herald-Tribune (down about 13,000 to 70,481).

Possible causes besides readers losing a newspaper habit cited by Editor and Publisher include increases in subscription fees as newspaper focus on squeezing more revenue from loyal customers and cutting back on circulation to distant coverage areas or to hotels and other third party recipients

 Click below to see the top 25 newspapers as reported by Editor and Publisher:

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL -- 2,024,269 -- 0.61%
USA TODAY -- 1,900,116 -- (-17.15%)
THE NEW YORK TIMES -- 927,851 -- (-7.28%)
LOS ANGELES TIMES -- 657,467 -- (-11.05%)
THE WASHINGTON POST -- 582,844 -- (-6.40%)

DAILY NEWS (NEW YORK) -- 544,167 -- (-13.98%)
NEW YORK POST -- 508,042 -- (-18.77%)
CHICAGO TRIBUNE -- 465,892 -- (-9.72%)
HOUSTON CHRONICLE -- 384,419 -- (-14.24%)
THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER -- 361,480 -- N/A

NEWSDAY -- 357,124 -- (-5.40%)
THE DENVER POST -- 340,949 -- N/A
THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC -- 316,874 -- (-12.30%)
STAR TRIBUNE, MINNEAPOLIS -- 304,543 -- (-5.53%)
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES -- 275,641 -- (-11.98%)

The PLAIN DEALER, CLEVELAND -- 271,180 -- (-11.24%)
DETROIT FREE PRESS (e) -- 269,729 -- (-9.56%)
THE BOSTON GLOBE -- 264,105 -- (-18.48%)
THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS -- 263,810 -- (-22.16%)
THE SEATTLE TIMES -- 263,588 -- N/A

SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE -- 251,782 -- (-25.82%)
THE OREGONIAN -- 249,163 -- (-12.06%)
THE STAR-LEDGER, NEWARK -- 246,006 -- (-22.22%)
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE -- 242,705 -- (-10.05%)
ST. PETERSBURG (FLA.) TIMES -- 240,147 -- (-10.70%)

Comments

[DoctorDoom]

Lin-

You miss the point. I am not panicked. It sounded like you were, but perhaps you are merely nostalgic.

As I said, news organizations will go away around the same time as bureaucrats.

I just refuse to feel guilt because I don't shell out money to the SPT. The SPT is what $0.25 daily? Not worth it to me. I am not a LOCAL news junkie, so the election of the mayor of St Pete means absolutely nothing to me in North Pinellas. I could not care less about the Bucs or the Rays. I don't read the comics and I have no interest in the latest Flower Show coming to town.

That being said, at least one of the 2 papers in this area will survive. I suspect the winner will look dramatically different than it does today. Maybe with the new information age, this market can only support one paper. Maybe they will offer online service for $3.65 a year. I might pay that.

As with most "catastrophies" recently, I just refuse to panic and have my actions driven by fear and/or sentimentality.

Because what happens is first people get scared, then they get stupid, then we all suffer - see most of what has seeped out of Washington in the past 20+ years. Then we get laws that would make newspapers tax exempt. Then whenever the ruling class does not like what is being said, they are hauled before Congress with threats of removing their exemption. See what happened to the Insurance Industry 3 days after they put out ads critical of the health care bill.

No way that would be good for the integrity of journalism.

but, I digress

[Lin Young]

Doctor Doom:No! I am not a member of the Chicken Little club, nor am I a member of the pie-in-the-sky or free-lunch clubs.

It was not my intention to provoke "fear and panic" in you over the prospect of losing your free-lunch, er, "free" news articles. I was only trying to point out the obvious.

Look, until recently we humans had to pay through the nose for the kind of smorgasboard of news and information on the Internet that we increasingly take for granted.

I remember loving going to college where the campus newsstand had that day's edition of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and all the Chicago newspapers. My friends and I often divvied up what we bought that day then swapped papers over coffee at the Student Union. A few years later I moved upstate to Chicago and fell head-over-heels in love with its newsstands. In addition to all the papers I had bought, borrowed or swapped and read in my college days, I could buy that day's edition of newspapers flown in from major cities in foreign countries.

When I traveled for business in seven southern states, I bought local papers with my morning coffee, along with the Atlanta Journal Constitution, which covered much of the South like the morning dew, as that paper was wont to say. But in larger cities I sought out newsstands to also buy the New York Times.

When I lived in Asheville, N.C., I had to go into the local newsstand and reserve, or order any out-of-state newspapers I wanted in advance, except for the New York Times, which they usually had enough of, or I had to drive down to the larger newsstand in Hendersonville.

It was a big deal when the New York Times began home delivery in select markets across the country. The world delivered to my lawn, no more trudging to newsstands or the public library.

Then came the Internet. And suddenly every newspaper was posting their articles free for the taking.

Can you imagine what would happen if restaurants gave away their food free?

Years ago I wanted to open a restaurant and was taking a course in hotel/restaurant management. I remember my professor cautioning us against discounting meals or issuing coupons. He said that once people got used to not paying full price for something they always expected to get it for less and would wait for another sale, or coupon. He said that having customers wait for a bargain could destroy our business and put us out of business.

The reason for that, of course, is that restaurants are out to make a profit. Most owners aren't willing to take money out of their pocket to keep the restaurant going. They expect the restaurant to earn enough money to pay the ongoing bills, including salaries, and also to put some money in their pocket too.

But back to newspapers.

It costs money to produce news. Newspapers expect to be able to earn enough money to pay the ongoing bills, including salaries.

Across the nation, virtually every newspaper has seen advertising revenues decline because businesses are hard-hit by this recession. Some businesses don't have the money to advertise while others have gone belly-up.

Most newspapers across the country have experienced a loss of revenue. That loss has resulted in most newspapers making cuts to staff and/or cuts to salaries. Some newspapers have gone out of business and others are still struggling not to close their doors.

I'm sorry if the truth panics you or makes you afraid. In explaining the truth of the situation newspapers are in, it is no more my intention to instill fear and panic in you than it would my intention to instill fear and panic in a child if I were called on to explain to that child that his or her parent had advanced cancer and might die.

You are an adult, I thought you might like to hear the truth about the "free" lunch, or smorgasboard of news articles you have been consuming on the Internet.

Although those news articles are currently free to you - a situation without precedent - those articles cost the news organizations that produced them money. You are not a child. You should understand that no business can survive forever if it gives its product away free.

[DoctorDoom]

Lin

Are you the president of the local Chicken Little chapter or just a member?

Panic and fear will not get me to support a failing local enterprise (SPT) that does not supply what I want to pay for.

I am not alone.

[Lin Young]

Joe Hillman: I have worked for newspapers in the past, but have worked for a subscription-based, online-only publication for over three years.

I'm glad you feel better informed thanks to the Internet than you ever have before. Too bad you don't understand that could all end in the near future.

As I said before, everything you are reading online is being produced by a newspaper, wire service or television station somewhere that is paying reporters to write news articles.

As more media outlets cut back or go belly-up, the amount of news available to you will continue to decline. You might see the day when not only is your "free" Internet news gone, but you can't buy news for any price. At that point you will care, but there won't be a thing you can do about it.

In the meantime, like a lobster in a pot of water being heated on the stove, you remain oblivious.

[joe hillman]

Lin Young:

In short, I... don't... care.

I'm starting to get the feeling you are irritated because whatever news organization you work(ed) for can no longer dictate what I or others read (i.e. think).

Once again, thanks to the internet, I am more informed and more well-read than at any point in my life, as I am wont to guess, so too are hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.

Exactly how is that a bad thing? I can answer my own question: It's not. It's a very good thing.

[Lin Young]

Joe Hillman & Doctor Doom: All online news comes from somewhere, generally from a newspaper that pays reporters to go out, find news and write articles. Most of the nation’s newspapers belong to the member-owned Associated Press (AP), the nation's largest wire service, which is struggling financially along with the newspapers. So don’t count on always being able to find news online.

Much of the news you read free comes from newspapers where people who live in the area feel like you do toward the St. Petersburg Times and Tampa Tribune, which is why subscribe when you can go online and read free. Well, if enough people stop subscribing the advertisers will cut back advertising even more, because who is reading their ad? And that will lead to more layoffs and fewer stories.

We have already seen most newspapers around the country lay off reporters and some newspapers have ceased publishing both their print and online edition – they went belly-up.

With most of the nation’s newspapers struggling as much as the Times and Tribune are here, although you might not care where your news comes from right now, in the future you might not find any.

As you read your "free" news online, check which publication it came from, then Google to find out if that publication is doing ok or if it is struggling to survive. You will find that most of your “free” news is coming from publications struggling to keep their doors open.

And remember Dr. Doom, Google news, Breitbart and Drudge Report do not produce any of the stories they run, they all post articles that were reported and written by newspapers, wire services or television news stations. You are merely linking to news sites around the country that are struggling like the St Petersburg Times and Tampa Tribune to keep their doors open.

And if anyone thinks that newspapers won’t go away because journalists do what they love and don’t care about money, I say have you ever asked a journalist if they would be willing to work without a paycheck? For sure I won’t. Why don’t you ask Eric if he will?

And don’t stop there.

As you read your “free” news online, why don’t you write down the media outlet it came from and the name of the reporter who wrote the article, then get their email address and ask them if they luvvvv journalism so much that they would be willing to work free.

[OneNewspaperTown]

To Factchecker,
Top line numbers mean nothing for circulation. Look at the details, and you will see some alarming trends at Tampa Tribune and St. Pete Times. Recently, Tampa Tribune has been propping their Sunday circulation with one-hit wonders of sponsored papers. In other words, get a sponsor to buy a ton of newspapers and then dump them on the market over a few Sundays, propping up the overall average. Smoke and mirrors. Look at the home delivery and newsstand numbers for what is really going on. Advertisers should take note so they don't get ripped off by this very very lame practice.

[DoctorDoom]

I agree completely with tallaman.

Mr Bill - I disagree. Advertisers have no responsibility to support one entity over another. They have a responsibility to their employer. When they get fired for not bringing revenue, they cannot appeal to the fact they advertised in the most socially responsible and informative publications around. Won't fly.

And James - if what you said were true, I might be inclined to agree. But, every in-depth report in the Sunday SPT is available online 2 days earlier (Feral girl, White House boys, Insurance feature, etc).

And, I can do the same thing (turn the page...) when I am on websites of news organizations since almost all of them have links to other stories on their website. Just like turning the page.

Citizens have zero obligation to support the SPT. Never have, never will.

And everyone can spare me the chicken little routine about the collapse of news and the dire consequences that will follow. Journalists will no sooner go away than bureaucrats.

[Mr. Bill]

Good investigative reporting on a local basis is in everyone's best interest.

It is all about the content. As the corporate boards pay only attention to the balance sheets and cut the content staff, then they are going to continue to decline.

And advertisers need to recognize a responsibility to supporting content publications instead of pure advertising pieces.

[Tallaman]

From a business perspective, it's just a matter of creating a new business model by establishing a revenue stream from a different type of media (the internet instead of paper deliveries). The decline was predicted several years with the advent of the internet and is now coming to fruition. As more people have access to the internet and feel comfortable reading "the paper" online, the fewer paper subscriptions news organizations will sell. WSJ seems to have stumbled on a new business model; let's see if it will last.

From an environmental perspective, less papers means reduced ink, fewer trees, less need for recycling. That's all good, right?

[james]

dr. doom, consider that you are immersed in the short, wire service paragraph about a story. No in-depth background and understanding. Not bad, just not the way you want to get all your news. (Just as you don't read all newspaper stories in-depth.)

Additionally, newspapers bring you stories that go beyond what you would normally pay attention to online - reading only those sites "of interest." Turn the page and you have the option of reading something you wouldn't have in the categories online or partisan screeds.

[james]

no newspapers = no reporting, more corrupt politicians and back room deals.

[mike]

dr doom rocks

[joe hillman]

i'm with doctor doom. i can't remember the last time i bought a newspaper. i can find so much more online.

and no, i don't care the source so long as it is a reputable source.

and yes, i do subscribe to a couple of news services online.

desite the fact i haven't bought a newspaper in years, i find myself significnantly much more informed than at any point in my life. i have a myriad of choices and sources to obtain information online. how exactly is that a bad thing?

i find reading news online much easier and enjoyable. why monkey with a fishwrap with limited information when i can read off a computer at home, at work or on my blackberry with nearly limitless information at my fingertips?

there will always be "newspapers," or local news outlets even if the physical newspaper dies. the source and brand name of a news organization won't.

no one gets into journalism for the cash. you have to have it in your blood. the love of the occupation, not unlike teachers.

that will never change. the only thing that will change is one won't have to have ink on their hands to obtain news.

[Kerry Fitpatrick]

WSJ increases have nothing to do with being "conservative". It is an outstanding source of relevant news and FACTS, unlike most other "news" sources out there.

[DoctorDoom]

Maybe this has something to do with the decline in readership...

"The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has reported that 63 percent of Americans believe news stories are often inaccurate"

Now, that's quality.

[Eric Deggans]

Bear in mind FactChecker, that the Tampa bay area has seasonal residents and newspaper subscribers.

So sometimes our subscriber base fluctuates every six months -- year-to-year can be a more accurate comparison...

[DoctorDoom]

The difference is Lin I don't care where it came from.

The news from NY, Chi, LA, Atlanta, SF, etc makes no difference to me.

The papers will not go away, they will shrink. Markets that cannot support them will go away. Boo Hoo.

I am not going to subsidize a failing local industry when I can pay for my WSJ subscription, and have the priviledge to not pay for however many reporters to get a free junket to London to cover the craptacular local football team.

My point is I have no more connection to the SPT or the Trib than I do to the Washington Post or Breitbart or reuters. They are just purveyors of information. And to be clear I grew up in Tampa and my old man had the Trib delivered every day (before the times was delivered in our area) and it carries zero nostagia for me to "smell the newsprint"

Newspapers will not go away. One of the papers here will die - probably for the good. This area possibly can no longer support 2 papers.

But, I am not going to cry over the market doing what it is meant to do. The weak players get weeded out. WSJ is the only thing I pay for and that is because it gives me what I wish to pay for. 20 years ago, I did not have that option unless I went to the newsstand and paid premium for it. Now the internet has opened up the world of information so that I choose what I want to read.

In closing, I did not say the paper was the horse and buggy, I said the printed paper is the horse and buggy. I think the paper would be less expensive if we didn't have to destroy trees and pay for the print.

Today I looked in my history and I went to the followinf websites for news (probably missed a few on my iPhone) NY Post; SPT; WSJ; Drudge: Google News; Washington Times; Chicago Tribune; Boston Globe; NY Daily News; TBO; Reuters; APnews; Breitbart; ESPN, CNNSi; NYT; Baltimore Sun. 20 years ago that list would have been - Tampa Tribune, NBC news, ESPN(TV); CNN(TV).

And not paying for a local news subscription has negatively affected my life?

[Robin 'Roblimo' Miller]

Hey. Don't blame me. I bought the TampaBay.com printout (AKA "St. Petersburg Times) Saturday for the first time in a long while. Was traveling to Orlando for a computer trade show, wanted something to read while I ate lunch.

It turned out that the coffee shop I hit had wireless Internet, so I was able to read it online, anyway -- along with the NYT, WaPo, and the Bradenton/Sarasota paperlets.

My reality = it's easier and more convenient to get my news via Internet than on paper. My wife grabs the Sarasota Herald-Tribune once a month or so for coupons and charcoal lighting, but besides that, what's the point of a paper paper?

[gemmountain]

Great point Lin! Internet news is scraped from the wires. Without local newspapers the wires would carry far less information. Google News and the like may be an attractive free alternative now but a future without newspapers would dry much of that reporting pool up.

[FactChecker]

These numbers are pretty alarming but it looks even worse for the St. Pete Times.

I googled for the actual newspaper circulation numbers six months ago. I tried to link to one site but I guess that's not allowed in these comments. Just search for "top 25 newspapers by circulation march 2009".

The March 2009 survey lists the St. Pete Times daily circulation as 283,093 and Sunday circulation as 413,929. Both were big percentage drops in themselves.

The current survey show St. Pete Times daily circulation is now 240,147 and Sunday circulation is now 370,050.

So from Mar 09 to Sep 09, there is a daily drop of 42,946 (15.2%) and a Sunday drop of 43,879 (10.6%).

The future already looked bleak with the numbers in the report, but these are even more depressing. The time is very near when the Tampa Bay area will no longer have a major newspaper.

[Lin Young]

Dr Doom:Most news on the Internet, including the stuff on the Huffington Post and Drudge report, either comes from newspapers or is in response to something that came from a newspaper. Kill newspapers and you will eventually find that perusing the Internet only yields the rants of nuts and ill-informed, self-appointed experts. The next time you cruise the Internet reading the news, check and see what the source is of the stuff you enjoy most. If you are reading commentary, check to see if the author is with an established news organization, or if the author made reference to something that appeared in mainline media. By mainline media I mean newspapers (including foreign publications), news magazines, television and radio news broadcasts and wire services.

If what you are reading came directly from mainline media, the name of the organization will be somewhere on the article, either at the top or the bottom. Sometimes the name of the original source will be in parenthesis in front of the first paragraph, which is generally the case with wire services, although not always.

News/Wire services are often abbreviated and include Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services (KRT), Los Angeles Times-Washington Post (LAT-WP), Bloomberg (Bloomberg) the Associated Press (AP), United Press International (UPI), Reuters (Reuters), Agency France Presse (AFP), Deutsche Presse Agentur (DPA) and dozens of others, including the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), which is Iran's official news agency. Some newspapers are also almost interchangeable with a news agency. That is the case with the China Daily, which gets much of its content from Xinhua News Agency (Xinhua), one of two official news agencies of communist China, the other being the China News Service (CNS)[not to be confused with Celebrity News Service (CNS)].

Anyway, my point is, most of the news you are reading "free" on the Internet comes from mainline media, which is paying reporters and editors to report, write and edit that news. If those organizations go away, so will your news. Well, except for the stuff coming from China, Iran and the Celebrity News Service, you will still get that. Hahahaha.

Anyway, next time you read your "free" news online, check and see where it came from. If you are unfamiliar with the name of the publication, or the abbreviation of the wire service or publication, Google it.

[Lin Young]

rriddler:Usually you have to put a code in to get the discount, maybe the code didn't work online. Try calling circulation with the offer they mailed you and see if you can't get the St Petersburg Times for $65.

[Dave Shafer]

Dr Doom,

You make an interesting argument. However, those that track our knowledge have noted a definitive drop in actual knowledge of events, politics, even geography with the rise of more information sites like the internet and cable has brought us. Coincidence???? I think not, but you are free to associate as you please.

[DoctorDoom]

rriddler-

Unless you have a small animal or a bird whose cage you need to line, you are really not missing anything. You just need to get a laptop to peruse while enjoying your am cup of joe.

The printed newspaper is the horse and buggy of information

[rriddler]

I don't want to just bash the SP Times, however. For years, I was a loyal subscriber to the Tampa Tribune, but in May, 6 weeks after I renewed, they cancelled delivery in Pinellas County.

Now, they have started home delivery in Pinellas again. You would think that they would go back to customers like me and make an attempt to get me to renew, but I have not received a single solicitation from them.

So now, for the first time in over 30 years, I do not get a morning paper delivered.

[rriddler]

Perhaps the SP Times could quit using deceptive practices to sell subscriptions.

I recently received an offer in the mail for a 1-year subscription @ $65.00/year.

When I went to the web-site to sign up, they wanted to charge me over $120.00 for my $65.00 subscription.
Seems they were adding a delivery charge of almost $50.00 to the subscription.
I might have been willing to pay that if it was simply offered up front, but the bait & switch that was attempted caused me to reconsider.

[Brendan]

"Possible causes besides readers losing a newspaper habit cited by Editor and Publisher include increases in subscription fees as newspaper focus on squeezing more revenue from loyal customers and cutting back on circulation to distant coverage areas or to hotels and other third party recipients"...COULDN'T POSSIBLY BE A DECLINE IN QUALITY, COULD IT? I THINK IT'S TIME NEWSPAPERS HAVE A REALITY CHECK AND STOP BLAMING EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE EXCEPT THEMSELVES.

[DoctorDoom]

The WSJ is not conservative.

The WSJ Op-Ed page is conservative.

Not sure it is an income issue either. The decline pre-dated the current economic downturn.

Dave S - you make an erroneous assumption that people get more from a lengthy article in a newspaper than elsewhere. More words does not equal more content - see some of my term papers for proof.

It is volume and access to media. Newspapers and Network TV do not have a monopoly on the flow of information anymore. People are getting their information from many sources. During a day I will hit this website, Drudge, Puffington Host, WSJ, google news and link through there to various news sites across the country. I get infintely more information that I did as a young guy reading the paper over my cup of coffee and catching Tom Brokaw on the NBC evening news.

[Rob]

Sue:
No, the Chicago Tribune endorsed Obama - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/17/ichicago-tribunei-endorse_n_135690.html

[Dave Shafer]

No doubt the recession has an effect on subscriptions, but looking at the history of other recessions and subscriptions there is definitely something else going on here. My opinion is that the recession only accelerated what is happening and that newspaper subscriptions will not rebound. As to the Wall Street Journal, it has reached out, as another poster noted, to a much wider audience and to giving more value for the $$. But, I wonder if they have lost subscribers too over the last couple of years???

[Lin Young]

I think a big part of the circulation decline for most newspapers is that so many people have suffered declines in income, especially during the ongoing recession.

And I don't think the increase in subscribers for the Wall Street Journal has anything to do with it being a conservative publication. The WSJ is a good source of information, and other than in editorials and columns, the WSJ - like other newspapers - presents news in a fairly neutral way. Plus most readers try to get news from more than one source anyway, in order to read around biases - or they should.

The Wall Street Journal has also been emailing some tempting offers to subscribe lately, including access to real-time stock quotes. I think their marketing and what they have to offer is largely responsible for their boost in circulation. They also snagged one of my favorite writers from the Financial Times earlier this year. So I think the increase in the WSJ's circulation is due to some of those things and to the fact many Journal subscribers have higher incomes than average meaning they have more disposable income. Wish I were in that category and I would re-subscribe to the WSJ. But my company gave no raises this year, they did that to avoid laying people off. But many people at companies here and elsewhere did lose their jobs, or got pay cuts.

I just hope that most of the nation's newspapers can hang in there and survive this recession. I think subscriptions will rebound with incomes. In the meantime, I'll continue with my annual subscription to the St. Petersburg Times and re-subscribing to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Christian Science Monitor and a few other publications will have to remain a goal on my wish list because my pennies are screaming already as I pinch them to fund other priorities.

[Sue]

@Rob - The Trib endorsed McCain for president, not Obama.

[Dave Shafer]

No the problem isn't of political orientation, its much larger than that. People get so much information in any given day, that they become adept at making quick decisions based on shallow understandings and moving on to whatever next grabs their attention. The real bad news for newspapers is that it just takes too long to actually read an article. Much faster to catch an internet headline or a TV talking head for about a minute and then you [think] know all you need to know. That of course explains why people [including journalist] can get so much wrong!

[Rob]

You're correct that a paper's political orientation has little or nothing to do with how much its circulation figures have dropped. All are tanking, sadly, with no end in sight.

But it might be stretching it to call the Chicago Tribune "conservative."

Yes, maybe the Trib is the least liberal of the city's two biggest daily papers. But the Trib, while "historically" conservative, in the last two decades has more often than not split things down the middle.

The Trib (whether due to advertising pressure or political pressure or fears of local outrage) endorsed Obama for President, and has endorsed many Democrats for political office in recent years.

[BSsniffer]

Eric, did you win the bet against yourself? Did you take the spread? Can you cover next months loss?

[OneNewspaperTown]

Why the newspaper carriers don't unionize is beyond me. They work 7 days a week for nothing in terrible weather at times. In some areas, it is downright dangerous to deliver but they do.

They should qualify for benefits, vacation, and more. Time to contac the NLRB, if I was a carrier.

[Super Scribbler]

Dave, you get paid per paper and obviously trudge through a Tampa high-rise in the pre-dawn hours for a paycheck that adds up to nothing. Did the Times recruit you from a homeless shelter or promote you from street corner vendor? Sorry Eric, there's no TBT in the lobby, just checked. Please don't bring a kiosk, we've already got plenty of debris in the street.

[Eric Deggans]

Had a bet with myself on how long it would take for a conservative to post a message on the board shoehorning a dig against the Times and a political message into the circulaton data, despite lots of evidence to the contrary.

you were late by about 20 minutes...

[BSsniffer]

The SPTimes lost 10.7% in circulation. That's 24k readers gone in 6 months! How much longer can this last? Let's do the math... 240,000 divided by 24k equals 10 x .05 (6 months) is five years. All my chips are on two.

*WSJ is doing something right, despite the leftie poo-poo spin. Could the Poynter Institute learn something from this, nahhh.

[Eric Deggans]

wow. we'll have to work on making your job harder. do they at least have a TBT kiosk in the lobby?

[Dave]

I work mornings in a certain newish Tampa residential high-rise, so I have to deliver the papers every day to their units.

You want to know how bad it is?

Out of around 200 residents, I deliver:

3 Wall Street Journals
3 St. Pete Times (although the delivery guy is spotty)
1 NY Times
1 Tampa Tribune (subscribed to by the building itself)

Hey, makes my job easier anyway.