VANISHING NEWSPAPER: SAVING JOURNALISM IN THE INFORMATION AGE (Paperback)

~ PHILIP MEYER (Author) "JOURNALISM is in trouble..." (more)
Key Phrases: Knight Ridder, Wall Street, New York (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Philip Meyer has set out to prove a point: that there is a strong correlation between newspaper quality and newspaper profits. Throughout, he presents powerful evidence that good journalism is an important shareholder value that can serve more traditional shareholder interests in quarterly earnings and rising stock prices."-Robert Giles; "Philip Meyer is highly qualified, and he has made an important effort to analyze editorial quality and profitability that deserves to be aired, debated, and built upon."-Gilbert Cranberg"

Product Description

Philip Meyer offers the newspaper industry a business model for preserving and stabilizing the social responsibility functions of the press in a way that could outlast technology-driven changes in media forms. This "influence model" is based on the premise that a newspaper's main product is not news or information, but influence.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 280 pages
• Publisher: University of Missouri; 1 edition (December 21, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0826215688
• ISBN-13: 978-0826215680
• Product Dimensions: 8.7 x 6.1 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #475,224 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A vital supply of context, December 27, 2005

By	Walter Neary "wneary1" (Lakewood, WA USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

You should give this book to anyone considering a career in newspaper journalism. If the person still decides to go into journalism, you know he or she is dedicated and belongs in the business!

With both anecdotes and detailed numbers and charts, Meyer describes the 'harvesting' of media properties in the 80's, 90's and beyond. Just as a landowner can harvest trees that have grown over many years, a publisher can pull out greater profits by reducing the expenses that produced quality and reputation over many years (like reducing the number and quality of reporters and editors).

Thus, this book is the equivalent of a VH1 'behind the scenes' docudrama explaining in painful detail the travesties we all saw in 80's and 90's newspaper management. Just as the rock band members look like heck by the end of an episode, newspapers are showing the effects of abusing their bodies. A carefully explained survey and analysis show that as many as three out of five newspaper stories are inaccurate in one form or another (Meyer's descriptions of this whole subject are considerably nuanced and a joy for anyone who has tried to quantify newspaper accuracy).

Much of the talk about journalism, quality and respect has been very fuzzy. We used to say stories were 'good' or 'bad' based on whatever was the criteria of the biggest editor in the room. We had no idea where individual stories or overall patterns of story quality fit into the newspaper's future. Meyer has detailed chapters quantifying whatever can be established about the role of profit and accuracy, profit and and credibility, and profit and the role of the various kinds of editors. To give just one example of the helpful level of detail in the book, Meyer writes that trouble may ensue once copy editors manage more than 14 stories a shift. That and other statistics will be useful for anyone who wants to manage for quality and growth.

The good news is that there is at least some connection between quality and profit. As just one example, an analysis in the book shows that for every percentage point of gain of credibility in the community, newspapers seem to command 2.5 percent more in their asking price for advertising.

That sort of thing matters because newspapers compete with targeted advertising vehicles like Google and blogs and standalone classified advertising sites. For most people, the newspaper is more portable; but that's a temporary advantage. Long term, what will distinguish papers from other advertising vehicles is the public's belief that newspapers are a more useful place to spend attention. Meyer's thesis is that newspapers must embrace this thirst for credible information. Newspapers must manage for both credibility AND for profit.

But keeping newspapers afloat with any sort of quality will be difficult. When everyone seems to focus on quarterly earnings reports, it's not easy to manage with long-term quality AND profitability in mind. So that's why I suggest giving this book to someone contemplating a future in journalism. Perhaps this book will prove to be as true about the future as it is true about the past. If so, the young journalist can go into work with eyes open and brain brightly illuminated.

10 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A "Must Read" For The Journalism Practitioner, February 8, 2005

By	will sites (Sullivan, MO USA) - See all my reviews

Philip Meyer has written an excellent book concerning the state of the American newspaper industry from the vantage point of spending a working lifetime within it. As an author and professor of journalism at one of the nation's most respected j-schools, Meyer offers a plethora of interesting facts and data concerning a societal shift away from the printed news page and the why's and how's of a slow (but not so certain) business demise. Is the American newspaper really sliding into the abyss? Will Wall Street abandon the printed news trade for more fertile economic ground? Should journalism students seek safer career havens?

Utilizing a wealth of contemporary studies and surveys, Meyer's The Vanishing Newspaper answers many questions and suggests that successful newspapers have positive influences in their respective communities through (among other factors) clear and accurate writing and social responsibility. By embracing new technologies - especially the ubiquitous Internet - newspapers can remain a respected source of information and viable business enterprise. Does accuracy and readability have a direct impact on circulation and ad revenue? What are the consequences of a newspaper's content? And just why are fewer people reading newspapers? Read and find out.

As an experienced newspaper publisher/managing editor/reporter, I highly recommend this insightful book for anyone involved in journalism - including students, teachers, writers, business managers and investors. No class, seminar, or casual conversation can supply the resources and suggestions found in The Vanishing Newspaper. Above all else, Meyer provides a realistic and positive outlook for those who love the profession and choose solutions over indifference.

Final word: This should be a mandatory read at every newspaper and j-school in America.

6 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Right book at the right time, July 11, 2005

By	Dane S. Claussen "Dane S. Claussen, PhD, MBA" (Pittsburgh, PA USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This book is a unique and excellent work attempting to statistically discover relationships between newspaper characteristics, newspaper circulations (and changes thereto), and communities. The newspaper industry was behind other U.S. companies that directly serve consumers for decades in conducting rigorous research. Now, with scholars like Phil Meyer and organizations such as the Newspaper Management Center at Northwestern U., the newspaper industry might finally find out what it needs to know to survive--as long as it is not already too late.
As for the other reviewer's charge that Phil wants papers to become more liberal, the reviewer has had to stretch to find what he found and then takes it out of context. The entire claim that newspapers are liberally biased is nonsense; in 23 out of 25 presidential elections in the 20th century, the majority of U.S. newspapers endorsed the Republican candidate for president. That is a fact. Check it yourself. Daily news coverage is heavily biased toward the status quo, whatever it might be, as reporters interview governors, senators, CEOs, etc.; they rarely interview union presidents and almost never interview true leftists, while constantly interviewing extreme right-wingers. The "liberal bias" charge is manufactured by the right-wing to try to make much of U.S. news media--which overwhelmingly is conventional, traditional, slowly changing--as reactionary and regressive as those making the charge.