[Dragonspirit]

It’s a dual front of technological alternatives AND liberal bias. No tears will be shed as the paper goes the way of the dinosaur.

As to the future, it is time that Republicans claim dominance in this new arena. It is our best hope, we can break the monopoly the liberals have held for so long if only our leaders will claim it. We control radio, we have Fox, and now we need to take more of the internet.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

Liberal bias is most definitely a big contributor Jeff. There may be a lot of people visiting newspaper sites online, but it these were ‘paying’ customers you would be able to save these papers by selling online access. People who work hard and have money to spend tend to be more conservative, in general. Losing those readers has a big economic impact, even if you replace them numerically with people who are liberal but who don't bring the same purchasing power to bear.

If your argument is valid, then how do you explain the inability of liberal talk radio to compete with conservative talk radio? How do you explain the success of Fox vs. CNN and the other liberal cable news outlets? Many newspapers have turned themselves into the print equivalent of “Air America”, with the same economic consequences.

[South40]

Liberal bias isn't killing newspapers

It's exactly the reason why I canceled the subscription to mine.

[Gator113]

Boston Globe’s death rattle.

I will not miss them.

[Lancey Howard]

Jeff Jacoby is essentially correct, although I would maintain that the newspaper industry’s vapid liberal Democrat agenda was at least a factor in hastening its decline. But who cares? It’s results that matter, and as long as the Democrat newspapers die, it doesn’t matter what the reasons are. America wins.

I want everybody associated with the Democrat newsrooms to lose their jobs, their homes, and their families. For what they have done to America they deserve nothing less. (spit)

(I do trust that good writers like Jeff can recover by writing books and finding internet sponsors for their columns.)

[Zakeet]

Liberal bias isn't killing newspapers

Jacoby, haven't you noticed that:

• Fox News is rapidly growing and now draws more viewers than the rest of cable news combined, while liberal programming is dropping at the rate of 5-10 percent per year

• Rush Limbaugh has trebled his listening audience in the past six months and the rest of conservative talk radio is booming, while Err America quickly went bust and the rest of radio is suffering

• Conservative newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal and Investors Business Daily are profitable growing, while dozens of liberal MSM rags are either in or are near bankruptcy because of dropping ad sales, subscribers and readers

Do you really think this is just an amazing coincidence, you simple ass?

[count-your-change]

Another autopsy of a dead horse. p.s., it wasn’t the beating by the internet that killed it.

[muir_redwoods]

If it’s a sea change in technology and not liberal bias that explains the Globe’s and the NYT’s problem, how does Jacoby explain the success of the WSJ?

[rhombus]

The success of the WSJ is NOT because of the conservative editorial pages. The news itself has been found to be just as liberal as the rest of them.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

WSJ readers are a completely different demographic than the NY Times, the Boston Globe, etc. I would suspect that many of their subscriptions are paid as business expenses rather than individual households. Newspapers are going down because they are "buggy whips". By the time anyone receives a newspaper these days, they probably already know the news via television, Internet, etc.

[Past Your Eyes]

The Glob cannot go away quick enough to suit me.

[markomalley]

Liberal bias, on the editorial page, is not a cause.

Liberal bias, when it gets translated onto the "hard news" pages, is the main reason.

One other reason: when reporters do most of their reporting using the "journalism by press release" technique, I stop paying much attention to those journalists.

[Aquabird]

This article explains why newspapers are dying but not in the way the author wants.

Newspapers do not see themselves as a business that cater to customers. When customers complain, they just say ‘screw you’ and keep doing whatever they want.

Many of the customers complaining are saying ‘liberal bias’. Whether they are right or wrong is not the issue, the issue is that the customers are unhappy with the paper. So they stop buying.

The author of this piece doesn’t even see anyone complaining as ‘customers’. The true reason why newspapers are failing is because newspapers thought they were in the newspaper business when, in fact, they are in the news and content business.

The argument that the ‘times have changed’ and ‘the internet’ and ‘young generation’ altered everything is just plain wrong. The railroads were destroyed not because of automobiles and airplanes but because railroads saw themselves in the railroad business, not in the transportation business. Western Union, who was the big telegram company, passed on Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone since they saw themselves in the telegram business.

You have to admire the narcissism of these newspaper people. Are they ever at fault, ever? Even with their business crumbling, are they at all wrong? Nope.

There are some newspapers that are growing in number. But, shhh, don’t tell the author this. The reason why these newspapers are growing is because they fit the customers’ needs (like being a paper for the subway), have content they cannot get anywhere else, and generally seek to satisfy the customer.

[RetiredArmy]

Naw. We all know how HONEST liberals and liberal media is. We all believe them. It is the papers just are so out of date, not touch pad easy. Sure, has nothing to do with liberal, leftist, communist, socialist, homofag, appeasement. Naw, nothing like that.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

The reason Internet news does better is because it's easier for us to to avoid the huge steaming plies of leftism than with a print version. All we need to look at is an article's title and know we want nothing to do with that spew. Liberals think they somehow have a right to force us to read their views and are put out when we don't care to see it.

[csvset]

My local paper had an article regarding how to have great garage sale. First suggestion: Post it on Craiglist ! Lol!

Today's paper arrived soaking wet. Hopefully the replacement arrives before the wife wakes up.

[rollo tomasi]

Given a choice, I would rather sit at the kitchen table with my family, reading the newspaper than sitting alone reading electronic print on a computer.

Reason why I don't subscribe to the daily fish-wrap is the spiking of important stories in order to cover up a member(s) of certain protected classes (Be it race or politician), MSM trying to shape their own perception into reality, AP bias, and covering up of authoritarian officials (Mostly dems) who our deemed “worthy” by press officials.

There is a nice sense of intimacy reading the paper with others, having conversations around the table about certain events, and going off to work/play that a computer screen/desk cannot duplicate. Laptops can be a pain to clean when the occasional coffee/OJ spill occurs.

[ReleaseTheHounds]

Newspapers are failing because Craig’s List has taken their only major source of income and skimmed the best of the classified ads from the newspapers. The revenue model no longer supports all of the infrastructure and costs of running a newspaper.

[pappyone]

Didn't see any reference to the BG union's demand for continuation of “guaranteed jobs for life”. That's gotta have a major impact on the bottom line.

[vetvetdoug]

Liberal bias isn't killing newspapers is like a man on fire saying the fire isn't killing himself. Newspaper reporters and editors, about 90% of them, are ostriches.

[maggief]

Liberal bias certainly is one factor ... and the reason I canceled my newspaper subscription.