They are boldly predicting that within the next five years, all but four major daily papers will have completely left the printed newspaper market.  That’s right, only four!  Those making the cut are The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today.  The Center also found it worthy to point out that two of these dailies already charge for online content, and that would be the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.  USA Today is planning to start charging within the next year.  As of now the Washington Post plans to still keep its online content free.

The issue at hand, is really a wide question.  What will happen if all content is really only available online?

For a lot of us, the idea that the printed newspaper is going the way of the dodo has already been long accepted. The increased online focus of many papers offers real time news and constant breaking updates, but the  lingering questions remain about what the loss of print papers will mean for the news itself.  Will online journalism, if it is the only medium, replace in depth investigative journalism?  For that we have to wait and see.

The Bell Tolls For Newspapers? Think Tank Says The Day Is Almost Here is a post from: The Inquisitr

Popular polling aggregation site FiveThirtyEight.com will be relaunched under the New York Times umbrella, blogger Nate Silver announced today.

The site rose to prominence during elections in 2008 when Silver posted several very accurate predictions. Silver says the site will “retain its own identity (akin to other Times blogs like DealBook), but will be organized under the News:Politics section” of the Times. Of his new gig, Silver says:

I will be contributing content to the print edition of the New York Times, and to the Sunday Magazine. The partnership agreement, which is structured as a license, has a term of three years.

Silver explains why he felt a partnership with the Times is a good fit:

There are two particular reasons why we felt the Times was the best home for FiveThirtyEight. On the one hand, I very much see what we are doing as a type of journalism, in the sense that it consists of doing original research on a timely basis to help inform the public discourse. Thus, the Times’ unflinching commitment to quality journalism makes for a natural fit, and I expect that the relationship will evolve in exciting ways as FiveThirtyEight is incorporated into a “traditional” newsroom setting. On the other hand, the terrific work of their graphic and interactive journalists was a major draw. The new blog should look and feel great, and should be substantially more robust and feature-rich than the simple, one-page design that we have now.

Silver says the partnership should start in 9-10 weeks, and he mentioned “early August” as a possible launch date. Politico was quick to point out Silver’s left-leaning ideology and support of President Obama in the 2008 election, but in the context of Silver’s work and his ongoing clear disclosure of the affiliation, it doesn’t seem like it should be a massive concern for the Times.

[Image]

The New York Times teams up with FiveThirtyEight blogger Nate Silver is a post from: The Inquisitr

The New York Times has added a San Francisco Bay Area metro report to its Northern California editions on Fridays and Sundays.

The new addition to the paper went into effect Friday, Oct. 16 and includes content written by New York Times staff as well as other local contributors. The Times already had a staff of 10 people in the bay area who, along with contributors, will write about public affairs and local lifestyle.

In the past, the Times had shown an interest in partnering with local news organizations and building a cooperative news outlet. Warren Hellman’s Bay Area News Project was one of those organizations said to be considering a partnership.

From Mediabistro:

“At a time when so many news organizations are in a forced retreat, it’s exciting to be part of a venture that has set out to build more and better news coverage,” said Bill Keller, executive editor of The Times, in the official release. “And as someone who grew up in the Bay Area, I’m proud that we can play a role in enriching the quality of reporting about the region.”

New York Times Goes Hyper-Local With Weekend Bay Area Edition is a post from: The Inquisitr

I am not a big reader of Seth Godin even though he is said to be one of the smartest folks in this realm we call new media. Every once in a while though I’ll catch one of his posts via a link in someone else’s post; or like I did today via Robert Scoble’s Shared Feed. It is this post of his today that has had me thinking for most of the day because what he wrote is in my opinion nothing short of brilliant.

In his post Seth walks us easily through why an old media icon like the Grey Lady has become; or is quickly becoming irrelevant but also why this didn’t have to happen. As a one time thought leader and a social-political influencer the New York Times had all the pieces it needed to survive our shift to a whole new way of interacting with our news and information. In fact; of the few really powerful news organizations the NY Times had the talent and the money that could have made it a formidable powerhouse of a new media giant.

As Seth points it could have easily surpassed anything that Wikipedia has done. It could have easily owned the territory now being held by blog networks like HuffPro or Daily Kos. It could have built a network of customized newsletters and blogs that would have provided them with a huge base of targetable audiences that advertisers drool over. The very fact that all these things could have been built on top of one of the largest archives of news; and some of the best writers in the business, all under the banner of The New York Times would have almost assured its place at the top any media – old or new.

This ignorance and fear of what being a part of any new media adventure was something that didn’t just affected the Grey Lady; but has indeed proven to be the downfall of all the major players in the old media world. It wasn’t as if some of those employed by bastions of old media didn’t see what was coming and grabbed on with both hands for the exciting ride. After all we have seen many in the industry become successful bloggers within their own right – not as employees of an old media company but as an individual with a solid reputation and authority behind them.

While old media giants concerned themselves with shrinking ad sales they failed to see that they were losing far more important things. It isn’t only newsprint either, just about every form of old media that is in the business of providing news, information and opinion is losing the same thing. In this rapidly changing landscape of news and information these once great providers are losing more than advertising dollars – they are losing their reputations and authority.

There are some that would suggest that they have lost those things quite some time ago and maybe so for a small segment of their readers; but for the larger majority I think the turning point has only just been reached.

That doesn’t mean that bloggers out there should be running around rejoicing in the demise of their competition. The fact is that the majority of bloggers still don’t garner the same type of respect and authority that even these dying beasts of the old media have at this point.

This is simply because we don’t have the footprints of time behind us and neither do we have the resources that still are a part of old media. As we go forward though this could very well change but reputation and authority are hard earned, taking time and patience. Whether or not the current crop of new media trailblazers have enough of either of those two things still remains to be seen.

It is safe to say though that without these two cornerstones – reputation and authority – no one will last; new media or old. It is the loss of those two things that I think is the greater failure. A failure that we in the world of new media must always remember or we too shall find ourselves replaced by something newer and better.

The greater failure of old media is a post from: The Inquisitr

Apparently one of the ads Dell is running includes a video clip with Mark Santora; a reporter from the New York Times. This would be fine in of itself except Mark says the clip is from an interview he did for Big Think, a web site backed by Peter Theil a big Facebook investor, and he never received any compensation for the ad. Besides not even mentioning the fact that the clip is a part of a larger interview for another site the idea of not getting approval from Santora or NYT is just plain stupid.

So what is wrong here? Well the FTC rules forbid deceptive advertising which in this case means an ad from Dell which suggests a New York Times reporter has endorsed the Dell vision of mobile computing when in fact he hasn’t. Like I said – not a very smart move Dell and you’d better hope that you don’t get slapped around for this.

You’d Think Dell Would Know Better is a post from: The Inquisitr

Newser also revealed that it is now allowing its readers to create threads of stories, allowing them to become part of assembling news coverage done by Newser editors.

Newser dubs its service as using human and machine-driven aggregation, delivering multi-media summaries. The only downside for me is that because news is distilled by editors, readers are then presented with what they deemed as must-read.

Newser Adds The New York Times; Needs Timely Aggregation Though is a post from: The Inquisitr