These are tough times for the newspaper business, and I have no idea what the Toronto Star‘s books look like. But how can it make sense to cut the entire Internet production staff? Yes, by all means, let’s eat next year’s seeds.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Aaron Read
I dunno, Dan. I’m as much a believer that the internet is a crucial part of any media-related business these days…but at the same time, I can easily see a newspaper eliminating the website, taking the hit overall, but saving enough money that they somehow manage on print alone.Granted, I’m a radio guy…not a print guy…and I bring a perspective to the table that says while some of the VERY most profitable stations have significant web presences, I would wager that the vast majority of lower-gross/higher-ROI stations still have crap websites that are little more than ad banner factories. The web is not where those stations make money; the airwaves still are.After all, it’s not gross revenue, it’s NET revenue. If you spend $99 to make $100, you’re still better off if you spend $5 to make $10…even though your gross is one-tenth.I suppose ultimately the Toronto Star is indeed robbing Peter to pay Paul, but hell, if their net profits rise for the next few quarters, then it’s hard to argue with the results…they’ll be doing better than most newspapers (which are showing negative net profit, are they not?). We keep talking about how the net is the future but damned if it’s paying for itself now…or looking like it’s going to pay for itself anytime soon.(shrugs)
BobH
Outsourcing?