Apparently, crazy non-factual opinion just doesn’t sell all that well. Kind of reminds me of the doomed “Air America” radio network.
Climate resistance writes:
There are of course a number of reasons for the decline of ‘dead tree media’, one of which is the rise of Internet-based media. However, the internet had been around for a decade before the series above begins, during which time sales were stable, or possibly even showed an improvement.
This one graph tells the story:
![independentAndGuardianCirculation[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/independentandguardiancirculation1.jpg?quality=83)
However, I prefer a different explanation. All newspapers have lost sales. But the Independent and Guardian have suffered more than average, and I don’t believe their catastrophism is coincidental.
See whole story here: http://www.climate-resistance.org/2014/01/buy-a-newspaper-or-the-planet-dies.html
=============================================================
Dana Nuccitelli, phone your office.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Guardian news paper to sell its most profitable asset that it purchased ten years ago; in a current bid to stay afloat.
Have you guessed what it is yet, what it could be that the Guardian, the big oil hating eco loons purchased all those years ago which made the money to subsidise their drivel.
Auto Trader http://www.moreaboutadvertising.com/2011/08/auto-trader-provides-50m-lifeline-for-the-guardian/
Yep the big western industry hating cretins purchased auto trader a journal that sells and promotes gas guzzling co2 producing automobiles aka CARS.
You have to laugh or you’d cry. This is the paper that had it’s banana and pea nut milk shake yearning journalist adventurers, on the ‘Ship of Fools’ the MV Akademik Shokalskiy which got stuck in Antarctic sea ice that wasn’t meant to be there due to AGW.
It’s also the broad sheet that harbours the AGW zealot Dana ‘Toxic’ Nuccitelli
who has recently attacked and maligned Prof Richard Lindzen.
http://www.webcitation.org/6MbyFNK4F
These people have no sense of personal behaviour and hypocrisy.
Anyhow Auto Trader sale will buoy up the sinking ship a while longer and I don’t mean the Akademik Shokalskiy .
[repetitive pasting snipped ~ mod]
Damn it I kept pasting and couldn’t see a thing bloody software.
Joe Chang, in the UK there is a real difference between Broadsheet and Tabloid. Broadsheets are still crucibles of ideas as they have been since the 18th century.
It is the Tabloids that rely on pictures. Whether of HRH The Duchess of Cornwall (Daily Heil) or the incredibly straight Kelly Brook (Star or Sun).
And the more salacious pics are on Page 3.
It’s so obvious. An increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration causes an exponential decrease in newspaper circulation. Finally makes sense why these news editors are so frantically pushing CO2 reductions schemes they’re just trying to save their cushy jobs.
Clipe, based on your link, it looks like overall distribution of UK newspapers has dropped from about 12.7 million in 2000 to 8.1 million in 2013. That’s a major hit to any industry.
Last I saw, Wall St. Journal was still increasing in circulation.
UK papers change from Aug 2012 to Aug 2013:
The Sun -9.76%
Daily Mirror -3.93%
Daily Star -8.72%
Daily Record -8.58%
Daily Mail -5.85%
Daily Express -3.61%
Daily Telegraph -4.55%
The Times -3.94%
Financial Times -15.65%
The Guardian -7.16%
The Independent -16.02%
i (new paper from the Independent) +4.85%
The people who believe the “We are Running OUT!!!” and distroying the planet tripe they pedal will stop “killing the trees” buying newspapers (as their propaganda is self consuming) and move to “sucking their own exhaust” web sites.
The people who think independently and clearly will be driven off by their left leaning spin.
Who is left to buy?…
Maybe some libraries and the BBC and a few other “institutions” that have not yet figured out the papers in the lobby are not being of benefit? Pretty thin soup…
For those who are not aware, the Guardian’s principal purpose in life is to publish once a week all the non jobs available in government – this causes a weekly spike in circulation.
Until you have read these non-job pages in the Guardian, you have no idea how bad government can be, for example:
1. An assistant to the assistant director’s assistant.
2. An exciting position in communicating gender awareness issues to the general public,
3. Climatologist to advise the council’s parks department on the dangers of climate change and its effects their amphibian populations..
Good news. The Guardian is a horrendous rag, it asserts its position as champion of the poor whilst condescending them. Its articles can always be reduced to simple narratives of goodies and baddies. Many of its journalists only life experience comes from Student Union bars and sociology textbooks.
In saying that, I think the fall in circulation should be viewed in light of online viewership. The other point, I suspect, is that younger readers are less concerned with detail and more with overall opinion. I suspect more readers seek confirmation of their own world view, and yes the Guardian as traditional press is probably as close as there is, its articles are still more nuanced that many news sites and single issue blogs.
I think the biggest issue facing news papers is their pricing. The average daily has fewer pages overall and even less devoted to actual stories. Ads comprise an ever increasing percentage of the printed pages. So it’s hard for the average person to justify paying more for less substance.
They seem to have fallen into the idea, wrongly, that because of declining subscriptions they need to increase prices. They don’t seem to understand that increasing prices leads to declining subscriptions. So instead of looking hard at the real reasons they lay blame elsewhere, which in most cases is the “new kid on the block”, i.e. the internet.
Whenever I buy a hard copy printout of the Internet, I buy USA Today.
As it has already been said, “Having said that I personally am deeply disappointed in it’s heavy handed moderation/censorship of comments in their online sections. They advertise that ‘comment is free’, it patently is not, and as a life long Guardian reader it pains me to see what has happened. The Guardian was once a champion of freedom of expression, currently it is almost impossible to follow the debate in some areas due to the dreaded censors red pen.” I can only add that I won’t bother commenting at the Guardian either.
Strong and systematic bias that eschews all meaningful discussion of balanced reality stops people showing up to give you money. Doh!
In sports they call it an ‘own goal’, kicked in by a (moon)bat.
That precipitous drop in late 2011 doesn’t seem apparent in the other graph referenced
by one blogger. Of course, being color blind, I eternally curse those who produce graphs and use colors – an amateur at work – colors should never be used to impart information – unless those colors can be distinguished by those with color deficiencies (blue and yellow are never mistaken
by anyone). Dotted, dashed, segemented,labelled, etc lines are the way to display graphical data when several lines are on the same graph.
“Wall St. Journal was still increasing in circulation.”
My recent WSJ subscriptions (one for me, one as a gift for my bro) are likely responsible 😉
Feels damn good seeing the WSJ on my lawn each morning. Give it a try.
I believe you may have it backwards. It is well known that newspaper circulation has been in general decline across the board. My take is that the decline in revenue in the early 2000s led to layoffs of journalists which led to a decline in quality of reporting. This, in turn, led to using more sensationalistic headlines to increase readership and revenues. As the headlines became more sensational and unbelievable, more and more of the readership abandoned these papers. The only thing keeping them in circulation now is that newsprint still costs less than regular paper if you plan on using it to line your pet’s litter box, or the bottom of their cage.
I found an idea that may increase their readership, and it’s environmentally acceptable – http://www.greenlivingonline.com/article/what-burn-your-fireplace
Gareth Phillips says:
January 22, 2014 at 2:40 pm
I think it’s really sad that a once great newspaper is falling on hard times. The newspaper media in the UK is saturated with right wing leaning papers with the Guardian being one of the few papers that takes a more liberal view.
================================================
For a certain value of “liberal”.
And define “right wing”.
But do they have Sudoku?
There is a feeling that things on the Internet should be available free of charge. I think this has doomed the newspaper. As we move to digital media we don’t want to pay. We may want to donate but that is vastly different and more personally rewarding.
same thing in Australia
Fairfax shares at near junk status as their alarmist papers circulation plunges
Guardian was not alone in its blind support for all things CAGW – all MSM have been complicit & suffered some decline as a consequence. fortunately, there will soon be nothing CAGW left to report:
23 Jan: Bloomberg: Alesandro Vitelli: EU Ban on UN Carbon May Flag End of Offset Market, Nomisma Says
A proposed European Union ban on the use of United Nations carbon credits in its emissions market may signal the end of the international offset market, according to energy consultant Nomisma Energia srl…
Factories in the EU’s carbon market have been able since 2008 to offset a portion of their pollution limits with credits generated by projects in the UN’s Clean Development Mechanism. The price for UN-overseen credits slumped 98 percent in the past six years, reducing the incentive for nations to invest in less-polluting energy in developing economies.
“The EU decision might be the end of the CDM as a market,” Matteo Mazzoni, an analyst at Nomisma Energia in Bologna, Italy, said in a phone interview today. “There will still be some trading and people will try to extract something from their investments in projects, but without any new demand there isn’t much of a market anyway.” …
Trade in UN Certified Emission Reductions dropped 70 percent to 464 million metric tons in 2013 after hitting a record 1.57 billion tons in 2012, according to data from ICE Futures Europe exchange in London…
“It’s disappointing that there’s no international offsets after 2020,” even from the least-developed nations, said Andrei Marcu, senior adviser at the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels. “That will put a dampener on investment in emission-reduction projects” and potentially on carbon-cutting programs in emerging nations, he said…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-22/eu-ban-on-un-carbon-may-flag-end-of-offset-market-nomisma-says.html
Oh well, they can console themselves with banana and peanut butter milkshakes.
The data: ex Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation#cite_note-abcsun-18
People no longer accept ‘one-way’ media these days, the ‘comments’ are now as important as the article. The Guardian is utterly ruthless in its sterilisation of opposing views from comments pages, therefore it has become one dimensional, and more to the point it betrays its fundamental insecurity about the views and opinions it promotes. Did I hear somewhere that George Soros was propping it up or did I just dream that?