tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36247850283184201922024-03-13T11:30:27.675-07:00Greatly ExaggeratedThe Myth of the Death of NewspapersMarc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-89458038653812078732023-04-06T18:35:00.007-07:002023-05-28T22:58:13.361-07:00The evidence is mounting that quality newspapers are here to stay thanks to online paywalls<p><i>The Times</i> of London filed <a href="https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/00894646/filing-history" target="_blank">its annual financials</a> with Companies House yesterday, and they showed that profits of the iconic UK title rose sharply in 2022 for the fourth consecutive year, to £82.9 million. That's up from £52.5 million in 2021, which was up from £26.3 million in 2020, which was up from £14.7 million in 2019. Talk about trending upwards. What a contrast to the years of losses piled up by the <i>Times </i>and its sister <i>Sunday Times </i>before owner Rupert Murdoch ordered a hard paywall erected around their online content in 2010. </p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhZdhbtkT_3Yjfb2-Mg7BdF4PSMpnSYvPrKP-2_4M_f8naJVO23TpXZcSvz5meM0Ue7DwWvWL8j_uEqDqd6sZUDXja1G5II62QUdX-nDR84ImXSsr25-cPHwBvHsacXrN7X14vTfTbQhIMqeX9gJ4_e9S3GzYIbniXkFYMu0plDlO7WMO-a8YCmKhUj" style="clear: left; display: inline; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="718" data-original-width="1122" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhZdhbtkT_3Yjfb2-Mg7BdF4PSMpnSYvPrKP-2_4M_f8naJVO23TpXZcSvz5meM0Ue7DwWvWL8j_uEqDqd6sZUDXja1G5II62QUdX-nDR84ImXSsr25-cPHwBvHsacXrN7X14vTfTbQhIMqeX9gJ4_e9S3GzYIbniXkFYMu0plDlO7WMO-a8YCmKhUj=w400-h256" width="400" /></a>Pandemic, what pandemic? Actually, the pandemic helped the <i>Times </i>titles and other quality newspapers because idled workers had plenty of time on their hands and were searching for reliable information on Covid-19. With its successive lockdowns, the pandemic accelerated several trends already under way thanks to the Internet, such as remote working, food delivery, and online news consumption. My recent book <i>Re-examining the UK Newspaper Industry</i> showed that newspapers there are doing <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/previewpdf.pdf" target="_blank">better than they have in years</a> thanks to the increasing adoption of online subscription schemes. Not all are successful, however, as the paywall Murdoch erected around his tabloid <i>Sun </i>attracted few paying customers, showing that while readers will pay for quality content, there is no market for the type of drivel that can be found online for free. </p><p>The kicker to the story, with which <a href="https://pressgazette.co.uk/comment-analysis/marc-edge-re-examining-uk-newspaper-industry-economics/" target="_blank">I ended Chapter 1</a> of my book, is that despite the online success of its Times Newspapers division during the pandemic, parent company News UK cheekily applied to be released from Murdoch's 1981 pledge to keep the <i>Times </i>and <i>Sunday Times </i>separate to preserve what little diversity of press ownership then remained. “The direct and indirect costs of maintaining the undertakings in the current circumstances risks adversely impacting the quality of journalism at The Times and The Sunday Times and, ultimately, the economic viability of the two titles,” it pleaded. It noted the declining print circulation and advertising revenue of its Times papers but made no mention of their growing online revenues. The Covid-19 crisis, it claimed, had put publisher costs "under further and unprecedented pressure, which is unlikely to abate in the short to medium term." The government agreed that there had been a "material change of circumstances" in the newspaper industry and lifted the restrictions after a consultation brought no objections. The irony is that 42 years on, diversity of press ownership is now almost non-existent in the UK, with <a href="https://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Who-Owns-the-UK-Media_final2.pdf" target="_blank">just three companies controlling 90 percent</a> of the national newspaper market, up from 83 percent in 2019. News UK alone controls 32.1 percent.</p><p>Since my book went to press, yet another academic study has confirmed my research findings,<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/16522354.2022.2104556" target="_blank"> this time in Spain</a>. That's on top of studies in <a href="https://www. tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/16522354.2017.1290024" target="_blank">Belgium </a>and <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/321974301_The_Swiss_press_model_Democracy_concentration_ and_digital_diversification" target="_blank">Switzerland</a>. Where I live in Canada, however, it is quite a different story with the country's largest newspaper chain teetering on the edge of bankruptcy for a second time despite a series of government bailouts since 2018, the largest of which amounted to $595 million but expires this year. Postmedia Network publishes 15 of the country's 21 largest dailies, but is 98-percent owned by U.S. hedge funds which have been squeezing it for every last drop of profit just to pay the crushing loans they also hold. Its revenues have dwindled to the point where they are now dwarfed by the chain's debt payments, so it has been forced to close titles, make mass layoffs, and <a href="https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/postmedia-shoots-more-hostages-to-keep-debt-payments-flowing-to-new-jersey-hedge-fund" rel="nofollow">even sell off some of its buildings</a>. </p><p>The country's leading daily, however, is forecasting a $30 million increase in its revenues for 2023. “While others cut back on print, we decided it was a good time to invest,” <i>Globe and Mail</i> publisher Philip Crawley <a href="https://wan-ifra.org/2022/05/how-the-globe-and-mail-has-managed-to-grow-revenue-subscriptions-and-print/" target="_blank">told the World Association of News Publishers last year</a>. “It does make a difference. Readers notice. As do advertisers.” While once 70 percent of its revenue came from advertising, Crawley added, the <i>Globe and Mail</i> was projecting that this year 62 percent would come from subscribers. Print still contributed “significant profitability,” however, with Crawley revealing that print advertising revenue rose by 8 percent in 2021 while its print subscription revenue grew by 1 percent, helping its print paper to an 18-percent profit margin. “We’re confident people will pay for access to good quality, trustworthy content,” he said.</p><p>Canada's newspaper publishers are hoping that the government will soon pass the <a href="https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/us-hedge-fund-bet-on-canadian-newspapers-may-be-about-to-pay-off-big" rel="nofollow">Online News Act</a>, for which they have been lobbying shamelessly. It would force Google and Facebook to share a portion of their revenues with them for supposedly "stealing" newspaper content, similar to legislation passed in Australia in 2021. The digital giants have made it clear, however, that they will <a href="https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/could-google-meta-quit-canada-over-bill-c-18" target="_blank">stop carrying links to Canadian news stories</a> rather than be used as a piggy bank by the country's media. While that could force the government to choose between bailing out the country's press yet again or letting the owner of most of its largest dailies go out of business, some Canadians are starting to think that the latter alternative might not be such a bad idea after all.<br /></p>Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-47697467258542430032020-11-11T18:27:00.014-08:002020-11-18T21:29:32.073-08:00Torstar . . . er, Nordstar going all-out for cash<p>Holy Joe Atkinson must be spinning in his grave. Earlier this year his nervous descendants sold off <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">– </span>for a pittance <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">– </span>the <i>Toronto Star</i> he turned into a journalism and social justice giant. Now that the country’s largest daily is in the clutches of private equity player <a href="https://nordstarcapital.ca/ " target="_blank">Nordstar Capital</a>, it is linking arms with the U.S. hedge funds that own most of Canada’s other major newspapers in a <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/big-tech.html" target="_blank">shameless cash grab</a>. A few weeks ago, its new Public Editor joined the chorus of industry association News Media Canada <a href="https://www.thestar.com/opinion/public_editor/2020/10/23/canadas-newspaper-publishers-call-for-a-new-regulatory-regime-to-safeguard-trusted-journalism.html" target="_blank">in demanding</a> a “new regulatory regime to safeguard trusted journalism.” The “free ride” for Google and Facebook must stop, wrote Bruce Campion-Smith as part of a NMC campaign urging Ottawa to halt their “monopolistic” practices. </p><blockquote><p>This is more than just an arm wrestle over digital ad revenues, the bulk of which have been snapped up by Facebook and Google. . . The two companies have used their market dominance to unfair advantage to control 80 per cent of digital ad revenues while not providing “fair” compensation for news content.</p></blockquote><p>He’s right. It is more than just an arm wrestle over digital ad revenues. It’s also an arm wrestle over online streaming services. Ottawa is about to make changes to the Broadcasting Act that will regulate the Internet for the first time in Canada. After years of promising “no Netflix Tax,” the feds have finally caved in to Big Media’s lobbying efforts to tax and regulate online video. The price tag is <a href="https://financialpost.com/telecom/media/feds-propose-changes-to-broadcasting-act-that-may-raise-800-million-from-streamers" target="_blank">an estimated $800 million.</a> I’m sure you realize who will end up paying.</p><p>But it is also an arm wrestle over <a href="https://nmc-mic.ca/2020/10/21/canadian-publishers-call-for-canadian-government-to-tackle-google-facebook-monopoly/" target="_blank">digital ad revenues</a>. Newspapers once got rich selling classified ads, but most of those have gone online to websites that offer cheap (or even free) ads. Facebook and Google have scooped up most of the rest by simply building better mousetraps for ads. Google gets about half of all digital advertising revenues by planting cookies on your computer that follow you around online to find out what you’re interested in. Then it sells ads tailored to your interests that show up on whatever website you are visiting. It is doubtless the perfection of target marketing. Facebook gets about half of the rest by letting people connect with others online and then slipping in the occasional ad. </p><p>Such technological cunning is unfair, Old Media seems to be saying. That ad money used to be theirs, and they want it back. The newspaper lobby is leaning as hard on the feds as the broadcasting lobby did, and they have the combined might of the nation’s press behind them. They want Ottawa to impose a “link tax” that will pay them every time someone posts a link to one of their news stories. Linking to journalism on the Internet, they claim, is nothing less than <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2020/09/23/throne-speech-promise-to-force-big-tech-to-pay-for-canadian-content-could-make-a-huge-difference-to-struggling-media-companies-advocate-says.html" target="_blank">“content poaching.”</a> It’s a bone-headed idea that has been <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/18/18188571/europe-copyright-directive-link-tax-article-11-13" target="_blank">tried elsewhere</a> to no avail. Now it’s being tried again in Australia, and NMC is jumping all over that fact to try and persuade Ottawa to attempt it here. </p><p>Unfortunately the newspapers are playing checkers while the tech giants are playing chess. All that Facebook and Google have to do is stop linking to news websites to avoid paying the tax. Traffic to those sites will drop off, and *ouch* you’ve gone and shot yourself in the foot again. University of Ottawa law professor <a href="https://www.michaelgeist.ca/" target="_blank">Michael Geist</a> has been all over this with some <a href="https://ipolitics.ca/2020/07/07/e-commerce-law-expert-warns-link-tax-could-hurt-not-help-publishers/" target="_blank">brilliant analysis</a>. So much so that Ottawa is apparently re-thinking the wisdom of such a tax. NMC is mounting a major counter-offensive, and the <i>Star</i> is all-in.</p><p>Its latest contribution to the debate comes from Vancouver correspondent Joanna Chiu. She’s been riding the Link Tax Express <a href="https://www.pressreader.com/canada/toronto-star/20201023/282303912627478" target="_blank">for a while now.</a> She seems earnest enough, <a href="https://twitter.com/joannachiu/status/1326297331034058754" target="_blank">posting on Twitter</a> that “I worked with editors on this piece with zero input from Torstar executives and in fact the piece includes some sharp criticism of media leaders’ handling of financial crises.” I am sure those Torstar executives are nonetheless delighted with her work. </p><p>Under the headline “<a href="https://www.thestar.com/business/2020/11/09/why-canadas-media-industry-is-in-more-danger-than-you-think-and-what-we-can-do-to-save-it.html" target="_blank">Why Canada’s media industry is in more danger than you think — and what we can do to save it</a>,” Chiu does her best to muddle through the technological and economic forces that have made it so difficult for her and other young journalists to find and hold a newspaper job. She starts her story the way any good feature should – with an anecdote. This one is about her hometown <i>Tri-City News</i> in the eastern suburbs of Vancouver. It has enjoyed a local monopoly since 2015, when the competing <i>Tri-Cities Now</i> closed down. Chiu laments this without mentioning how the local news monopoly arose, which is the real reason Ottawa should take action. She fails to mention that local news is also covered by the <i>Vancouver Sun</i> and <i>Province</i> dailies, although their newsrooms were merged in 2016 in another glaring example of federal inaction. </p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>Chiu posted a link to her article on Twitter which at last glance had garnered 385 likes, 215 retweets, and 93 comments. Now THAT is social media savvy. The first dozen or so replies were from herself in what turned into a veritable tweetstorm of alternating explanation, rationalization, and quotation from her article. “I wrote this to try to investigate what's going wrong with my own industry, and the impacts on wider society,” <a href="https://twitter.com/joannachiu/status/1326281336974430209" target="_blank">she explained</a>. “Since I returned to Canada from working overseas, I've faced two rounds of layoffs at my paper,” <a href="https://twitter.com/joannachiu/status/1326282449442234368" target="_blank">she continued</a>. “I'm honestly surprised that I still have a job at this point.”<p></p><p>Her angst points up the so-called “<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/3pihuSGPsjia4eDcJPG3/full?target=10.1080/17405904.2019.1570290" target="_blank">precariate</a>” in which journalists of her age must usually find work. It is heartbreaking but not inexplicable. Chiu just doesn’t explain it very well, preferring to rely on NMC’s explanation. “Market failure is an economic situation where free market forces like supply and demand don’t function as they should,” <a href="https://twitter.com/joannachiu/status/1326285466770018304" target="_blank">she tweets</a>, “and this is what's happening to media industries around the world.” <i>Au contraire</i>, free market forces like supply and demand continue to work just fine. The problem is that consumers no longer demand newspapers because they can now get a cheaper and more timely substitute for what they provide.</p><p>Then she tweeted a link to <a href="https://www.thestar.com/business/2020/11/09/saving-the-journalism-industry-will-require-community-support.html" target="_blank">her story’s sidebar.</a> “Here is a list of more than 250 Canadian newspapers that ceased publication since 2013.” That’s when my head achieved liftoff from my torso and went into several orbits around the sun. OMG, as the kids say. I study Canadian newspapers. There are fewer than 100 dailies and about 1,000 community newspapers. The loss of 250 titles in seven years would be an industry evisceration. I was thus keenly interested to look at her list. Most of the titles were of newspapers I had never heard of before and were no doubt these giveaway local “shoppers” that land on your doorstep unbidden. Some were of commuter dailies, a species which once flourished but has now gone extinct. Some were Ontario community newspapers Torstar itself closed after a dodgy 41-title trade with Postmedia which now finds both chains under federal investigation on possible criminal charges of <a href="https://financialpost.com/telecom/media/competition-bureaus-concerns-over-postmedia-torstar-newspaper-swap-revealed-in-court-filing" target="_blank">conspiracy to reduce competition</a>. Now that's chutzpah.</p><p>Soon after achieving re-entry of my cranial module, I dashed off a letter to the editor of the <i>Star</i>.</p><p></p><blockquote><p>Why Canada’s media industry is in more danger than you think, Chiu, Nov. 9</p><p>The Star exaggerates the number of newspapers lost in Canada recently and fails to report the real reason some have been closed or merged. It is not true that “at least 250 Canadian newspapers have shut down since 2013.” Data on the News Media Canada website show there were 974 community newspapers in July compared to 1,019 in 2013; 72 paid dailies (94 in 2013); and five free dailies (19 in 2013). We thus have 81 fewer newspapers now than in 2013. Most of the closures and mergers have been a result of questionable corporate horse trading. The Tri-City News you point to in Greater Vancouver is a perfect example. Its monopoly was created when Glacier Media acquired it from rival chain Black Press and closed its own Tri-Cities Now. The two chains traded 14 newspapers in 2014 and closed or merged most competing titles, which somehow failed to attract Ottawa’s attention. A similar 2017 trade of 41 mostly Ontario titles between Torstar and Postmedia, which saw almost all of them merged or closed, is under investigation by the Competition Bureau on possible criminal charges of conspiracy to reduce competition. The real reason Canada’s media are in danger is misinformation like this, which brought the ongoing $595 million news media bailout and now seeks to wring billions out of Facebook and Google. Supporting research can be found on my website at <a href="http://www.marcedge.com">www.marcedge.com</a>.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>I have no expectation they will print my letter. They never do, or even respond to my offers of op-ed explainers. So I tweeted it in bite-sized replies to Chiu’s tweet. Then I realized the most delicious irony of all. On doing a database search to ascertain its page placement, I saw that her article and its sidebar never appeared on the <i>Star</i>’s pages, only on its website. Maybe it will see print if it gets enough likes. Alongside my reply, of course. I’m all-in on that.</p>Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-3072668351781946042020-05-17T08:55:00.003-07:002020-05-29T14:23:41.355-07:00Who is the real Journalism Doctor?John Miller curiously quotes 19th Century circus operator P.T. Barnum in support of his contention that newspapers are essential to acquiring news and information these days. Ouch! Has the retired Ryerson University journalism professor not heard of the Internet? In an embarrassing screed posted on his blog <a href="https://www.thejournalismdoctor.ca/Blog.php/the-paper-killer">The Journalism Doctor</a> and reprinted on <a href="https://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/journalism-doctor/2020/05/ottawa-dithers-while-local-newspapers-die">rabble.ca</a> as “Ottawa dithers while local newspapers die,” Miller notes that a number of local newspapers have folded or suspended publication since the pandemic hit. As a result, he claims that “tens of thousands of us have been cut off from our only sources of local news.” I’m sorry, but I can’t hold it in any longer. OK BOOMER. And I’m a boomer! But John has been retired for so long that he might actually hail from the Greatest Generation. Sorry, I couldn’t resist.<br /><br />Contrary to what Miller claims, there has never been as much news and information available literally at our fingertips. This is especially true when it comes to the big story these days. All of the latest Covid-19 facts and figures can be found with the click of a mouse if you have any search skills, along with all of the health advisories and warnings. You don’t even have to wait for the Pony Express to drop off the latest edition of your local weekly any more. And if official health information isn’t your cup of tea, you can go on Facebook or Twitter and find no shortage of news links, citizen journalism, contrary opinions, and yes, even conspiracy theories. If anything, the problem is too much information, not a lack of it.<br /><br />I can certainly sympathize with Miller. Like him, I’m an old newspaper journalist. I love newspapers. I fiercely defended both their importance and viability in my 2014 book <i>Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death of Newspapers. </i>As I have told him, I greatly enjoyed reading his important 1998 book <i>Yesterday’s News: Why Canada’s Daily Newspapers are Failing Us</i>. It was about how Conrad Black was ruining Canada’s press, of which he certainly did a good job. But that is so much Last Century’s News. Things have changed a lot in the ensuing 22 years, in some ways for the better, but in other ways much for the worse. Black got out of the newspaper game at the millennium while the getting was still good. The problem he created went to another level in the following decade, however, and it has reached crisis proportions in the past 10 years. Now that we are on the cusp of a third post-millennium decade, I fear the worst-case scenario may be coming true – non-stop swindling combined with total bamboozlement. <br /><br />Media ownership in Canada has degenerated into nothing less than a series of scams. The “convergence” scam of newspaper-television cross-ownership that was popular at the millennium imploded within a decade as Canwest Global went bankrupt and the Globe and Mail divorced CTV. The latest scam is called “financialization,” in which debt is weaponized. The former Southam newspaper chain which Black passed along to Canwest was scooped up out of bankruptcy by a consortium of U.S. hedge funds which had bought up its distressed debt at deep discounts on the bond market. They used some of the debt to bid for the company at auction, renamed it Postmedia Network, then kept the rest on its books to ensure they get paid first every month. In short, they are skimming it off the top. There might not be much money in owning newspapers any more, but there is in owning high-interest debt, some of which was taken out at 12.5 percent by a desperate Canwest. This isn’t just happening in Canada. Hedge funds now own seven of the 10 largest U.S. chains, including Gannett, the country’s largest, which two of them fought a bidding war for last year. Apparently the vulture capitalists understand something few others realize – there is still some money to be made in newspapers, which may actually be the way of the future in news since digital media have so far been unable to find a viable business model.<br /><br />The takeover of our largest chain by Americans was inexplicably allowed by the Harper government despite a supposed 25-percent limit on foreign ownership of newspapers. Then in 2014 Postmedia bought Canada’s second-largest chain, Sun Media, which was inexplicably allowed by the federal Competition Bureau despite it giving the vultures 15 of our 21 largest newspapers, including both dailies in four of our six largest cities. Postmedia promised to preserve newspaper competition in Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa, but soon merged the newsrooms of its duopoly dailies there to cut costs in order to keep paying its debt. It has been bleeding both chains dry ever since, all the while demanding government handouts by claiming they are losing money. Quite the contrary, Postmedia Network saw its profits rise slightly in the first six months of its 2019-20 fiscal year, to $26.8 million from $26.4 million in the same period a year earlier, according to the <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Postmedia-Network-Canada-Corp-FS-Q2-F20-FINAL.pdf">quarterly report</a> it issued last week.<br /><br />Miller, who isn’t really a doctor (I am. Of journalism, no less.) demonstrates how misinformed he is by claiming that “news media have only two sources of revenue – subscriptions and advertising – and both are in steep decline.” Advertising revenue has certainly drained away, mostly to Facebook and Google. Newspapers worldwide have rearranged their business models to compensate, however, by boosting their circulation revenue. Most are now charging more for hard copies they once sold at a loss to maximize their ad rates. While numbers are not available for Canada, U.S. newspapers increased their print circulation revenue <a href="https://www.journalism.org/fact-sheet/newspapers">by 12 percent from 2011-17</a>. And while no real hard numbers are available on either side of the border for digital circulation revenue, most newspapers in Canada and the U.S. are now charging for online access by erecting “paywalls” that require a subscription after a few free articles every month. When the Toronto Star erected one in 2018, that brought the total to <a href="http://www.cmcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/The-Growth-of-the-Network-Media-Economy-1984-2017-01142019.pdf">65 percent </a>of Canadian newspapers with a paywall, while <a href="https://journalism.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/summary-paywall-research-anna-lewis-05-2018.pdf">77 percent</a> of U.S. newspapers charged for online access. <br /><br />Postmedia saw its profits jump by 18 percent in 2017-18 after swapping 41 newspapers with Torstar, Canada’s new second-largest chain, then closing all of its acquisitions to create lucrative new local monopolies. The Competition Bureau finally acted, however, raiding the offices of both chains after leaked documents reportedly included agreements between Postmedia and Torstar not to compete for years in the markets they vacated and even on which employees would be axed. The chains and their executives now face fines of $25 million and prison sentences of 14 years on possible criminal charges of conspiracy and monopoly. Coming hard on the heels of its newsroom mergers, which prompted Parliamentary hearings in 2016-17, you would think the vultures would be flocking rapidly toward the border. Instead they somehow engineered a miraculous reversal of fortune which gifted them with a $595 million government bailout. How this happened is quite the story, which I am currently unraveling for my forthcoming book <i>The Great Canadian Media Swindle</i>.<br /><br />Suffice it to say that Postmedia could not have done it without a little help from its friends. Industry association News Media Canada, which Postmedia dominates by dint of its ownership share, has run a masterful campaign with the aid of media consultants, journalism academics, and think tanks like the Public Policy Forum. NMC is headed by Winnipeg Free Press publisher Bob Cox, who seems like a nice enough guy and heads one of Canada’s last independent dailies. When you see Bob Cox quoted, however, think about how much less persuasive his arguments would be coming from Paul Godfrey, who until recently was Postmedia CEO.<br /><br />Miller, who now hangs out his shingle as an expert witness, curiously gives over more than half of his screed to an “email interview” with Cox, which allows him to update the propaganda campaign Canadians have been inundated with for the past few years. It could be summed up as “we need money – give us money.” It certainly worked, to the tune of $595 million. But that is just a start, if Big Media in Canada have anything to say about it. They have their eyes on all that money U.S. digital giants like Facebook and Google are making and want Ottawa to gift them a portion of that, too. The total <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/tangled.pdf">could add up to billions.</a> For that to happen, however, Big Media will need a lot more help from their friends.Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-87047316252465834612019-09-03T11:09:00.000-07:002020-04-05T10:23:53.428-07:00Starving Canadian media giants – A case of real fake news<i>This review originally appeared in the September/October
issue of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives magazine</i> <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/tangled.pdf" target="_blank">The Monitor</a>. <i>It was subsequently reprinted in</i> <a href="https://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2019/09/05/New-Book-Canadian-Media-Giants/" target="_blank">The Tyee</a>.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>The Tangled Garden: A Canadian Cultural Manifesto for the
Digital Age <br />
Richard Stursberg (with Stephen Armstrong)<br />
James Lorimer & Co., April 2019, $24.95.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When U.S. television stations set up transmitters just
across the border in the 1970s to beam their signals into Canadian homes, and then
began selling ads here, it started a trade war that lasted a dozen years. To
keep the ad dollars at home, Ottawa passed a law that disallowed as an income
tax deduction the expense of advertising on a foreign station. The U.S. retaliated
by declaring non-deductible the expense of attending conventions in Canada, which
put a serious crimp in our hospitality industry. The dispute was only settled
with the 1988 Canada–U.S. Free Trade Agreement. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-z0lLw1r8RUA/XW6sBw6h28I/AAAAAAAAAwg/ABnShxlG0y0VG0jcdHhqxksePs3c9sbEACLcBGAs/s1600/Stursberg%2Bcover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="926" data-original-width="620" height="400" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-z0lLw1r8RUA/XW6sBw6h28I/AAAAAAAAAwg/ABnShxlG0y0VG0jcdHhqxksePs3c9sbEACLcBGAs/s400/Stursberg%2Bcover.jpg" width="266" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Plus they stole my cover design!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
History is now repeating itself, as many in Canada want to extend
our treatment of broadcast advertising to digital media, to stem the flow of ad
dollars to foreign giants like Google and Facebook (the FAANGs), which have
been siphoning off revenue from newspapers and television networks worldwide.
These same voices also advocate taxing foreign streaming services like Netflix,
Apple and Amazon, and forcing them to both transmit and fund Canadian content. The
billions of dollars available to be clawed back from the foreign digital giants,
they argue, would help finance government subsidies to Canadian media, such as
the $595 million promised in the 2019 budget to boost journalism. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Richard Stursberg is one of those voices, and he sets out
this argument simply enough for the average Canadian to understand in his new
book, The Tangled Garden. In doing so, however, he plays fast and loose with
the facts and inflates the threat to Canadian media of the foreign digital
giants. Stursberg notes that these U.S. companies have so far avoided paying
tax in Canada on their services to Canadians due to Ottawa’s reluctance to
regulate the internet as it has broadcasting. (The FAANGs presumably pay income
tax in their own countries, however, which in the case of Facebook is very low
in Ireland.) That will soon change if Stursberg has anything to say about it. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As a consultant, Stursberg seems to specialize in coming up
with ways for Big Media in Canada to wheedle money out of Ottawa. For this he
was no doubt prepared by his 25 years in Canadian broadcasting, including six years
as head of the CBC’s English services. His book tells how he was hired by
Rogers, our second-largest media company after Bell, to write a “paper” a few
years ago that floated the idea of using tax credits to aid our country’s
supposedly ailing media companies—a direct subsidy without the need for any
application process. “If the costs qualified,” notes Stursberg, “the payment
was automatic.” <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That got the attention of Paul Godfrey, at the time CEO of
Postmedia Network, Canada’s largest newspaper chain. (Postmedia publishes 15 of
our 22 largest dailies but is somehow 92% owned by U.S. hedge funds.) Godfrey
liked Stursberg’s idea about tax credits so much that he invited him to dinner
with Postmedia’s board. Together with the likes of David Pecker, then publisher
of the National Enquirer, who represented the American vulture capitalists,
they decided to pitch the idea to other newspaper publishers and “finance a
study on how tax credits might work for them.” In this effort Stursberg enlisted
the aid of “media economics expert” Stephen Armstrong, a long-time Ontario
civil servant who is also now a consultant. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Stursberg tells a fascinating tale about how our news media ended
up with the $595 million they are currently deciding how to divvy up. At the
height of their disagreement over how the money should be paid out, he recalls
that one publisher told him: “At the end of the day, if the money has to be
delivered in a brown paper bag late on Sunday nights in the alley, we’ll take
it.” But a few hundred million is chump change in Canada’s cultural economy,
which Stursberg estimates is worth $54 billion and employs 650,000. The big bailout
bucks will of course go to television because it’s the backbone of Canadian culture.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Tangled Garden is an unabashed exhortation for the
“sleepy” Liberal government (a word Stursberg actually uses in a chapter title)
to fire up the tax collection machine to pump more money into Cancon. He counts
up all the dollars that would flow back to Ottawa and Canadian media companies
by taxing the FAANGs, and it comes to billions annually. Making them pay (and
charge) HST on their sales to Canadians would bring in $100 million a year just
for starters. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But making digital ads on foreign digital media not
tax-deductible should repatriate about $1.3 billion inads sales to domestic
media annually. Taxes on ads that don’t migrate back north (to Canadian firms) would
run an estimated $590 million a year. Making Netflix and other foreign
streaming services contribute 30% of their Canadian revenues to fund Cancon, as
the national networks are required to do, would bring in an estimated $438 million
next year alone. Stursberg does a very good job of shaking money from trees. No
wonder Godfrey likes him.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Aside from the wisdom of trying to repatriate tax and ad revenues
from the U.S., with a trade hawk like Donald Trump in the White House, the only
problem with Stursberg’s argument is its premise. “If the federal government
does not wake from its torpor, the major Canadian media companies are likely to
collapse,” he warns. “If this happens, English Canada will be effectively
annexed by the United States.” <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Stursberg claims that big media companies in Canada have suffered
“losses as far as the eye can see” due to declining ad sales. Their financial failure
would bring about “the utter collapse of Canadian culture,” he colourfully
predicts, leaving us with the “arid and lifeless landscape of an abandoned
culture.” The closure of Postmedia, which he claims has lost money every year since
2011, “would mean that there would no longer be any local papers in many of
Canada’s largest cities.” It and Torstar, Canada’s second-largest newspaper
chain, are losing at least $35 million a year, he claims. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is so much nonsense, to use a polite word. It is the
Big Lie of Canadian media. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The big media companies in Canada are corpulent cash cows that
grow fatter by the year, as a glance at the financial statements posted by law
on their websites will confirm. Bell made $9.5 billion in profit last year (earnings
before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) on revenues of $23.5
billion, for a profit margin of 40%. Its media division, which includes the CTV
network, made $693 million on revenues of $2.68 billion, which were up slightly
from 2017. That’s a profit margin of 26%. (Bell made 42.5% profit margin on its
$12.4 billion in landline revenues last year and 42.6% on its $8.4 billion in
cell phone revenues.) <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rogers made $6 billion in profit last year, up 9% from 2017,
on revenues of $15.1 billion, for a profit margin of almost 40%. Its media
division, which includes the Citytv network, made a profit of $196 million last
year, up by more than half from 2017, on revenues of $2.2 billion, for a profit
margin of 9%. (Rogers made almost 48% on its $3.9 billion in cable revenues
last year and almost 45% on its $7.1 billion in cell phone revenues.) Making
money at that rate, Rogers can afford to hire a lot more media consultants like
Stursberg to sing the blues for them. Come to think of it, a small share of its
lush cable revenues, which come largely from monopoly internet service
provision, would go a long way toward funding Cancon, but that’s the last thing
Rogers wants to hear.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even the newspaper companies are hardly losing money, as my
research has shown. While their revenues have gone down precipitously in recent
years, they have been able to keep their heads well above water through painful
cost cutting, which is admittedly not good for Canadian journalism. Postmedia
made $65.4 million in profit last year, up 18% from 2017, on revenues of $676
million, for a profit margin of 9.7%. Of that amount, however, more than $25
million went to paying down its massive debt, which is held mostly by its hedge
fund owners. They kept it on the company’s books strategically as an income
source after acquiring the former Southam newspaper chain for pennies on the
dollar out of the 2010 bankruptcy of Canwest Global Communications. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even if Postmedia went bankrupt due to debt, however, its
profitable dailies would continue to publish under new ownership. You don’t
just close down a business that makes $65 million a year. Torstar made $60.7 million
in profit last year on revenues of $615 million, for a profit margin of 9.8%. Its
profits went down $13.5 million from 2017, however, perhaps due to the
estimated $20 million Torstar spent in developing its failed tablet app. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The chains regularly report enormous net losses, but these
are only achieved after deducting huge “paper” losses that estimate the reduced
value of their businesses. Postmedia is often cited as losing $352 million in
its 2015-16 fiscal year, but that was only after deducting $367 million in
asset impairment and the extraordinary $42 million expense of severing staff.
On an operating basis, it actually earned $82 million that year, of which $72
million went to paying down its debt.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One thing you won’t find referenced in The Tangled Garden is
critical research done by real media economists, such as Dwayne Winseck of
Carleton University, whose Canadian Media Concentration Research Project tracks
the ever-increasing consolidation of our media and the enormous profits they
make. When you examine the facts and ignore the corporate propaganda, Stursberg’s
garden turns out to be not just tangled, but overgrown with weeds.</div>
<br />Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-76750936118111131612019-08-06T16:12:00.001-07:002019-11-15T22:36:44.661-08:00Why Are Newspapers Still Here?<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vx0LxRDyxLM/XVN6m4VcMVI/AAAAAAAAAwM/K5jvHjd0LH0AIscOdDwFynUv9Tbxs6N1ACLcBGAs/s1600/ME%2BAEJMC.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="300" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vx0LxRDyxLM/XVN6m4VcMVI/AAAAAAAAAwM/K5jvHjd0LH0AIscOdDwFynUv9Tbxs6N1ACLcBGAs/s400/ME%2BAEJMC.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<i>Introduction to a panel held at the Association for Education in Journalism </i><br />
<i>and Mass Communication convention on Thursday,</i><br />
<i>August 8 in Hall B of the Sheraton Centre Toronto Hotel</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Spoiler alert – it’s very
simple. Newspapers are still here because they still make money. Not as much as
they used to make. They used to make an obscene amount of money. Now they are
having to cut costs as fast as they can just to keep their heads above water. But
newspapers are inherently profitable thanks to some economic features such as
vertical integration, elasticity of demand, and economies of scale. So while
they have slimmed down considerably, they are still publishing profitably
despite what you may have heard elsewhere. This is a line of research I have
been pursuing for almost a decade, first in this country, then in the U.S., and
now in the UK, where I am working frantically to finish a book on the subject. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Meanwhile digital media, which have been widely touted to
replace print media, have struggled to find a profitable business model. If
they don’t, how can they replace print media, especially if the latter are actually making money? Caught
in the middle, of course, is journalism, especially local news coverage, which
is what gets cut back most, to the detriment of democracy. It’s a conundrum
that policymakers are confronting differently in different countries. Here the
apparent solution is to throw money at media, as subsidies worth almost $600
million (about $450 million U.S.) were announced in the last federal budget. This
country’s news media are now fighting over how to divvy up the loot, and it looks
like most of it will go to old media – newspapers – to prop them up. And in
Canada that unfortunately means most of the money will be going to New Jersey
hedge funds. It’s a long story.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cEHBOU1vRn0/XUw25y01cUI/AAAAAAAAAwA/lcdHB8jdwBUOpfN0azab1VhOOo2YPmPAgCPcBGAYYCw/s1600/PPT.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="722" data-original-width="1281" height="225" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cEHBOU1vRn0/XUw25y01cUI/AAAAAAAAAwA/lcdHB8jdwBUOpfN0azab1VhOOo2YPmPAgCPcBGAYYCw/s400/PPT.png" width="400" /></a></div>
Let’s start at the beginning. This year marks the 10th
anniversary of the so-called Newspaper Crisis. After the long-publishing Rocky
Mountain News folded and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer went online-only in the
depths of a global recession in early 2009, predictions ran rampant that
dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of newspapers would soon fold. Michael
Wolff predicted that: “About 18 months from now, 80 percent of newspapers will
be gone.” USA Today predicted that: “At least one city – possibly San Francisco,
Miami, Minneapolis or Cleveland – likely will soon lose its last daily newspaper.”
Time magazine warned on its website: “It’s possible that eight of the nation’s
50 largest daily newspapers could cease publication in the next 18 months.” In
the UK, whose newspaper industry I have been studying most recently, media analyst
Claire Enders predicted to a Parliamentary committee in 2009 that up to half of
the country’s 1,300 local and regional newspapers would close within five
years. “Many titles are already running at losses and are being sustained by
the good graces of their owners,” she testified, “and that may not last.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course, 18 months passed and far from 80 percent of American
newspapers were gone. None of the nation’s 50 largest daily newspapers had
ceased publication. San Francisco, Miami, Minneapolis and Cleveland still had a
daily newspaper. They still do. After Denver and Seattle, the contagion was
confined to Tucson and Honolulu. The recession gradually eased, but more
importantly newspapers proved incredibly resilient, able to cut their costs
almost as fast as their revenues fell frighteningly by a third and then by half
and now by even more. Unfortunately, they were only able to cut costs so quickly by
throwing journalists overboard, so while the outlook may have brightened
somewhat for newspapers, it only darkened for journalism. None of what I am saying
should be taken to mean that newspaper journalism is thriving. Quite the
opposite. I am only saying that newspapers as businesses are hanging in there
and should for the foreseeable future.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the UK, five years passed and only about 100 newspapers
had closed instead of the 650 Claire Enders predicted. Most of those were free sheets
which had proliferated in the 1980s to soak up all the ad revenue, what we
would call “shoppers.” The only paid regional daily to close was the Liverpool
Post, which was a second-place newspaper. In this country, only one daily
folded during the recession of 2008-09, in Halifax. It was immediately resurrected,
incidentally, as a free commuter tabloid, Halifax Metro. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This year also marks the fifth anniversary of my book Greatly
Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death of Newspapers, which examined the finances
of publicly-traded newspaper companies in the U.S. and Canada going back to
2006, before the recession began. It found that none had suffered an annual
loss on an operating basis over an eight-year period and that most were posting
double-digit profit margins, with some in the 20-percent range. Of course, they
were doing so on greatly reduced revenues as classified advertising mostly disappeared
and digital advertising came nowhere near making up the difference. Newspaper
profits were a fraction of what they were before the print advertising bubble
burst in 2004. At the height of the boom, operating profits were routinely
above 20 percent, with some in the 30-percent range, as monopoly newspapers
could even approach 40-50 percent return on revenue. That is, they could keep 40-50
cents in profit for every dollar that came in the door as revenue. The dailies
that folded had all been second-place afternoon newspapers, which in a declining
industry proved to be an endangered species indeed. Newspapers aren’t dying so
much as newspaper competition is dying. The monopolies that remain are still mostly
profitable.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unfortunately, much confusion has been caused in the public mind
by the multi-million-dollar losses often declared by newspaper chains, which
tend to grab the headlines. These are “extraordinary” losses only on paper, as
under the accounting rules companies are required to regularly revisit the
value of their business. If it goes down, as it invariably did for newspapers
due to their declining revenues and earnings, that loss has to come off the
books somehow. It did so, under the accounting rules, through the annual profit
and loss statement as an extraordinary loss. On an operating basis – money
coming in the door minus money going out the door – newspapers still have their
heads well above water. That should be true indefinitely, as they have proven
to be quite scalable enterprises that can be made larger or smaller as
necessary. It is important to remember that newspapers began as small
businesses, often one-person operations. On their present trajectory they are
at worst on track to return to that status.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Much confusion has also been caused in the public mind by
declining circulation, which is often pointed to as a harbinger of newspaper
doom. This ignores the counter-intuitive fact that most newspapers lose money
on circulation sales. They of course make it back and more from advertising.
Cutting back on circulation has thus been a way for newspapers to cut costs, as
it is increasingly expensive to truck copies farther and wider to readers of
diminishing interest to their advertisers. At the same time, they have asked their
readers to pay closer to the actual cost of producing a hard copy of the
newspaper, often doubling or even tripling subscription rates, as Iris has
found. Given the well-proven elasticity of demand for newspapers, many more
readers than not were willing to pay more. Much more. The truth is that newspapers now
have more readers than ever thanks to the Internet. It’s just that most are
reading it for free, and that has to stop if newspapers are to survive.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Even more confusion has been caused in the public mind by the
dozen or so bankruptcies of newspaper companies, which also tended to grab
headlines. These were invariably due to heavy debt loads taken on in making ill-advised
acquisitions before the print advertising bubble burst. The newspapers
themselves remained profitable throughout and thus continued to publish under
new ownership.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unfortunately, many of the new owners were hedge funds which
had bought up their debt at pennies on the dollar when the companies were
facing bankruptcy. These so-called “vulture capitalists” owe no fealty to journalism
and are instead fixated on the bottom line. They well understand the inherent
profitability of newspapers, however, and took over several major chains for
bargain prices. The recent upsurge in their acquisitions speaks to the
continued profits to be made in the newspaper business.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The problem of hedge fund ownership has been seen nowhere
more than in this country. Despite a supposed 25-percent limit on foreign
ownership of newspapers, U.S. hedge funds were able to acquire out of the 2009
bankruptcy of Canwest Global Communications our largest chain, the former family-owned
Southam Inc., for which I worked for almost 20 years. In a nifty piece of
financial engineering, the hedge funds kept most of the debt they had
accumulated on the company’s books, ensuring they would get paid first every
month whether or not it made money. Unfortunately this has meant throwing even
more journalists overboard just to service the debt held by its hedge fund
owners. Renamed Postmedia Network, it took over the country’s second-largest chain,
Sun Media, five years later, giving it 15 of the country’s 22 largest dailies. Despite
promising not to merge the duplicate dailies it thus owned in five of the
country’s six largest cities, it merged their newsrooms in four cities shortly
after receiving approval for its takeover from our oddly impotent Competition
Bureau. The largest chains here, Postmedia and Torstar, make profits in the
10-percent range. Postmedia made $65 million in profit in its most recent
fiscal year, while Torstar made $60 million, yet they will soon be getting financial
assistance from taxpayers. Their annual reports are posted on their websites.
Check them out if you don’t believe me.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the UK, the picture is more varied. While in the U.S. I
was able to access the finances of only about 40 percent of the industry, as
that is the segment which is publicly traded on stock markets, and in Canada
about 75 percent, in the UK I can get more than 100 percent. That’s because the
regulator there, Companies House, requires annual financial statements from all
companies, whether publicly traded or privately held, whether parent, holding,
or subsidiary. While I was unable to unravel the finances of News Corp. dailies
in the U.S. because they were lumped in with the company’s newspapers in
Australia and the UK, not to mention several book publishing divisions, in the
UK you can get separate financials for the Sun and the Times because they are
published by separate subsidiaries. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The results are interesting. The Times was for years a
money-loser for Murdoch as a vanity quality daily, and before him the Thomson
family of this town, whose building is right next door. It has actually been making money for the past few years,
however, since erecting a hard paywall around its content. This began to
reverse what has been called the “original sin” of newspapers, which was giving
their content away for free online. When you think about it, that really isn’t
a very good business model. A similar paywall around the Sun’s content had to
be dropped, however, for a lack of customers. The lesson was that people will
pay for quality, but they won’t pay for crap, an abundance of which is of course
available online for free. Most newspapers have now introduced a so-called
“metered” paywall online as perfected by the New York Times, which at last
count had more than 4 million online subscribers paying more than $800 million
a year. Of course, not all newspapers are the New York Times, but most can
generate revenue from online subscriptions, and today every little bit helps.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Other UK newspapers have found their way by heading in
different directions. The Daily Mail has made money from online advertising, despite
the digital dominance of Facebook and Google, by creating the world’s most
popular English-language website. Unfortunately its content is more clickbait
than solid journalism. The Guardian, which has kept its solid journalism free
for all to read online, found the cost was eating into its rich Scott Trust too
rapidly, so it began selling memberships. Its loyal readers responded by taking
out more than a million of them, contributing tens of millions of pounds to
Guardian journalism every year and putting it on track back to profitability.
Most newspapers, however, have benefited from the metered paywall, which was
actually pioneered by the Financial Times in the UK. It proved so successful
there that it turned the business daily around from losing tens of millions of
pounds annually into a cash machine for which Nikkei paid £844 million in 2015.
That’s about a billion U.S. dollars.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It wasn’t supposed to be like this. The Internet was
supposed to bring a great flowering of journalism online, but so far that
hasn’t happened because nobody has yet come up with a viable business model for
digital news media. The economics of the Internet are exactly the opposite of what
they are for newspapers, which are profitable because they tend toward
monopoly. The Internet tends toward infinite supply, and under the first law of
economics – supply and demand -- that only drives prices down. Digital startups
can scarcely compete for advertising with Google and Facebook, which have
simply built a better mousetrap. Who would have predicted 20 years ago that a
search engine and a social network would be the most profitable digital media?
Yet many somehow blame newspapers for not foreseeing this and instead getting
into those lines of business.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Newspapers will continue to publish in print because they
have a robust business model. It is often said that their business model is “broken,”
but if you still have your head well above water after your revenues have
fallen by more than half, I’d say you’re hanging in there pretty well. Plus
there’s just something about print on paper that people prefer, especially for
longer reading. The advent of e-books, for example, has hardly meant the death
of printed books. Most importantly, print is also still a preferred medium for
some types of ads because of its higher engagement levels and favorable demographics.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We have of course recently had another newspaper casualty
and thus seen renewed predictions of the coming extinction of a medium. The long-publishing
Youngstown Vindicator sadly announced it is closing at the end of this month,
but it had some unique problems in a depressed area and was apparently not very
well run. More troubling to me are recent predictions by insiders Dean Baquet and
Warren Buffet that newspapers will be going away. Baquet gives most local
newspapers five years, while Buffett predicts only a few large dailies will survive,
but I predict that these predictions will also prove at least premature. Newspapers
may no longer be the big fish in the news media pond, but I predict they will remain
one of many smaller fish swimming well for the foreseeable future, both in
print and online.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-2080618460476096862019-08-04T13:04:00.000-07:002019-08-04T17:24:33.336-07:00Greatly Exaggerated in Canada<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i>A paper presented to the Canadian Communication </i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i>Association </i><i style="text-indent: 0in;">conference, </i><i style="text-indent: 0in;">Vancouver, June 1-5, 2019</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: center; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Abstract</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0in;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The newspaper
industry in Canada is portrayed as being in “crisis” by research which has
exaggerated its financial decline and apparently inflated the extent of
publication closures. Publishers have been campaigning for government
assistance since the Internet has taken most of their advertising revenues. The
two largest newspaper chains are under investigation by the federal Competition
Bureau on possible criminal charges of conspiracy and monopoly after trading 41
newspapers between them and closing 37 of them. The country’s largest chain is
98 percent owned by U.S. hedge funds and must send much of its dwindling
profits south to pay the interest on the company’s massive debt, most of which
the vulture capitalists also hold. Parliamentary hearings on local media
recommended government assistance in 2017, after which the newspaper industry
bid for a billion-dollar bailout, which was quickly rejected. Over the ensuing
year, however, pressure grew on Ottawa to assist the country’s news media
financially. Dire warnings have been issued from industry and researchers of
the consequences to the country’s news media of government inaction. Inflated
estimates were given of the number of newspapers that have already perished.
Finally, Ottawa announced in late 2018 a $595 million package of tax credits
and other subsidies. Yet the chains are still comfortably profitable, with
operating margins of about 10 percent return on revenue. Most of the newspaper
closures have resulted from questionable and possibly criminal dealings between
their owners that have reduced or eliminated competition. This paper examines
the “crisis” in the Canadian newspaper industry and compares the dire warnings
of impending doom and the inflated estimates of newspaper closures with
publicly available data. It concludes that a campaign for government assistance
has been conducted by or on behalf of newspaper chains. Insights into this
campaign of disinformation have potentially important public policy
implications for the proposed $595 million program of federal government
assistance.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<i>Keywords:
newspapers, mass media in Canada, media economics<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The late U.S. media
scholar Ben Bagdikian saw a long-running disinformation campaign he called the
“myth of newspaper poverty” obscuring what was instead their considerable
profitability. “American publishers have always felt obligated to pretend that
they are an auxiliary of the Little Sisters of the Poor,” he wrote in a 1973
article for the Columbia Journalism Review. “This was always amusing, but now
that so many papers are owned by publicly traded companies which have to
disclose their finances it is taking on the air of slapstick.” Publicly, noted
Bagdikian, publishers complained about rising costs. <span style="text-indent: 0in;">“Privately most have
had a different kind of problem: how to get rid of profits.” </span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="text-indent: 0in;">In an almost unprecedented
move for newspapers, the Harris papers in Kansas, Iowa, and California actually
reduced advertising rates, though their circulation trends didn’t force them
to; otherwise their profits would have been beyond [anti-inflation] limits
designated by the Government.</span><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%; text-indent: 0in;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" style="text-indent: 0in;" title="">[1]</a></span></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="text-indent: 0in;">A
recession in the early 1970s, he noted, prompted publishers to complain of
financial hardship in order to justify cutbacks in hiring. “This is mostly
hogwash,” claimed Bagdikian. “American daily newspapers are one of the most
profitable of all major industries in the United States. And they were during
the 1970-71-72 ‘Great Recession.’” Data on newspaper profits were hard to come
by, noted Bagdikian, because “of all industries, newspaper publishing is the
most obsessed by financial secrecy.” Increased ownership of newspapers by
publicly-traded companies, however, had opened a window into the hitherto
secretive world of newspaper finances. A typical metropolitan daily with a
circulation of 250,000 was very profitable, noted Bagdikian, even in the depths
of a recession. “In 1970 such papers showed a pre-tax profit of 23.5 per cent.
In 1971 it was 23.2 per cent. The 1972 figures had not been completed at this
writing, but authorities agree that 1972 will be better than 1971.”</span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" style="text-indent: 0in;" title=""><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[2]</span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The poverty myth was
used to best advantage by publishers, noted Bagdikian, in campaigning for
passage of the Newspaper Preservation Act of 1970, which exempted partnerships
between formerly competing dailies from anti-trust laws on the basis that
newspapers were a “natural monopoly.” Local newspaper competition was in the
midst of an historic extinction, but the survivors would prove more profitable
than ever, especially the government-sanctioned duopolies, which had the added
benefit of helping to keep any new competitors out. Far from being
unprofitable, according to Bagdikian, newspaper owners instead faced the
problem of what to do with their overflowing coffers. Reinvesting as much as
possible in acquisitions became the preferred method of dealing with excess
profits, which according to Bagdikian was “fueling an already frantic race to
acquire communications properties.”</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Some independent
publishers no longer attend the annual ANPA [American Newspaper Publishers
Association] meeting because they must spend all their time resisting the
embraces of the big chain paper-buyers. One small publisher said he felt “like
a virgin stumbling into a stag party.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn3;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[3]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a></blockquote>
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn3;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[endif]--></span></a></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Bagdikian’s
suspicions had been aroused a few years earlier after a Senate committee in<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Canada forced media
companies to open their books. The three-volume report of the Senate
Sub-committee on Mass Media described what it found as “astonishing.” Media
owners were making enormous profits. From 1958 to 1967, before-tax profits at
Canadian newspapers ranged from 23.4 percent to 30.5 percent. After taxes, they
were 12.3-17.5 percent, compared to 9.2-10.4 percent in other manufacturing and
retailing industries. “Owning a newspaper, in other words, can be almost twice
as profitable as owning a paper-box factory or a department store,” observed
the report.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn4;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[4]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
The secrecy surrounding their financial success, the Senate committee declared,
was delicious in its hypocrisy. “An industry that is supposed to abhor secrets
is sitting on one of the best-kept, least-discussed secrets, one of the hottest
scoops, in the entire field of Canadian business – their own balance sheets.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn5;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[5]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
Pointing out that chain ownership of Canada’s daily newspapers had grown to 45
percent in 1970 from 25 percent in 1958, the Senate report urged government
action to stem the rising tide of newspaper ownership concentration, but none
was taken.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Bagdikian’s landmark
1983 book The Media Monopoly exposed what he called the “best kept secret in
American newspapering” – its profitability. <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn6" name="_ftnref6" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn6;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[6]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
The growth of newspaper chains, Bagdikian pointed out, had led to the industry
being dominated by only 14 companies. Newspaper chains, broadcasting networks,
and other media conglomerates were buying up media outlets at a rapid rate
because of the industry’s peculiar economics, which created an almost
irresistible urge to merge. By then, the situation was even more dire in
Canada, where only three companies published 58 percent of all English-language
dailies. The closure in 1980 of the long-publishing Ottawa Journal and Winnipeg
Tribune by competing chains, which gave each one another lucrative local
monopoly, prompted a Royal Commission on Newspapers which recommended limits on
how chain ownership. None were enacted, however, and by 1999 Canada came to
have one of the highest levels of press ownership concentration in the world,
with the top five chains owning 93.2 percent of the country’s daily newspapers.<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn7" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn7;" title="">[7]</a></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn7" title=""><!--[endif]--></a></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>From poverty myth to
death myth<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Fast forward 20
years and the poverty myth has become a death myth. The Canadian newspaper
industry of 2019 is in apparent crisis. Publishers have been campaigning hard
for government assistance after a disastrous ownership experiment at the
millennium left the country’s news media devastated. The two largest newspaper
chains are under investigation by the federal Competition Bureau on possible
criminal charges of conspiracy and monopoly after trading 41 newspapers between
them in 2017 and immediately closing almost all of them. The country’s largest
chain is 98 percent owned by U.S. hedge funds and must send the majority of its
dwindling profits south to pay the interest on the company’s massive debt, most
of which the vulture capitalists also hold. Postmedia Network publishes 15 of
the country’s 21 largest dailies after buying most of the second-largest chain
in 2014. The takeover was approved by the Competition Bureau after Postmedia
promised not to merge the duplicate dailies it thus owned in Calgary, <span style="text-indent: 0in;">Edmonton, Ottawa,
and Vancouver, but it merged their newsrooms nonetheless in late 2015. A newly-elected
Liberal government soon convened Parliamentary hearings on local media, which
sat for sixteen months and recommended government assistance in mid-2017. The
newspaper industry quickly bid for a billion-dollar bailout, which was just as
quickly rejected. Over the ensuing year, however, pressure grew on Ottawa to
assist the country’s news media financially. Dire warnings were issued from
industry and academics of the consequences to the country’s news media of
government inaction.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="text-indent: 0in;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Inflated estimates
were given of the number of newspapers that have already perished. Finally,
Ottawa announced in late 2018 a $595 million package of tax credits and other
subsidies. Yet the chains are still comfortably profitable, with operating
margins of about 10 percent return on revenue. Most of the newspaper closures
have resulted from questionable and possibly criminal dealings between their
owners that have reduced or eliminated competition.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
One 2012 study found
U.S. newspaper coverage of their supposed crisis exaggerated its scale with
“over-amped drama,” relied “too heavily on the views of newspaper publishers
and too little on empirical data,” thus “creating a false impression that the
whole industry is ‘dying,’’’<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn8" name="_ftnref8" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn8;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[8]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
The 2014 book Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death of Newspapers, which
studied the finances of publicly-traded newspaper companies in the U.S. and
Canada, found that all remained profitable from 2006 to 2013 despite an historic
drop in advertising revenues. Most maintained double-digit profit margins
throughout by cutting costs, with some as high as 20 percent. More than a dozen
chains entered bankruptcy during the 2008-09 recession, it noted, but only as a
result of high debt levels. Their profitable newspapers continued to publish
under new ownership.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn9" name="_ftnref9" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn9;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[9]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
This paper examines the “crisis” in the Canadian newspaper industry and
compares the dire warnings of impending doom and the inflated estimates of
newspaper closures with publicly available data. It concludes that a campaign
for government assistance has been conducted by or on behalf of newspaper
chains. Insights into this campaign of disinformation have potentially
important public policy implications for the proposed $595 million program of
federal government assistance.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Newspaper ownership
in Canada<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
News media in Canada
were transformed at the millennium by cross-media ownership, which had been
strongly warned against by the Royal Commission on Newspapers. A prohibition on
joint newspaper-television ownership was thus briefly instituted, but it was
allowed to lapse in the mid-1980s after a change in government from Liberal to
Conservative.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn10" name="_ftnref10" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn10;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[10]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
This allowed “convergence,” as cross-media ownership became known, to reshape
Canada’s media in 2000 after the AOL-Time Warner merger in the U.S. popularized
the paradigm. By the end of that year, Canada’s two largest privately-owned
television networks had partnered with national newspaper owners, as had the
largest privately-owned French-language network in Quebec. CTV was acquired by
Bell Canada<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Enterprises, which
then partnered with the Globe and Mail national newspaper to create a<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
$4-billion
multimedia enterprise initially known as Bell Globemedia. Canwest Global
Communications, which owned Global Television, bought the country’s largest
newspaper chain, Southam Inc., for $3.2 billion. Quebecor, a printing and
newspaper company that started in Quebec but had expanded nationwide with its
1998 purchase of the Sun Media chain of tabloid newspapers, then paid $5.4
billion for Quebec’s largest cable company, Group Videotron, which owned the
TVA network.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The convergence
paradigm ended in disaster within a decade, however, as Canwest went bankrupt
due to its high debt load in 2009 while CTV and the Globe and Mail voluntarily
dissolved their incompatible partnership. Canwest was de-converged when its
newspaper chain and television network were sold off separately out of
bankruptcy. The former Southam newspapers went to a consortium of Canwest debt
holders, mostly of U.S. hedge funds, which became known as Postmedia. It then
bought 175 of the 178 newspapers owned by the Sun Media chain from Quebecor for
$314 million in 2014.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>The campaign<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
A campaign for
government financial assistance has been conducted by newspapers, mostly
through their industry group News Media Canada, since Postmedia’s purchase of
Sun Media was approved in 2015. Dire warnings have been issued about the future
of newspapers in Canada and inflated estimates have emerged of the number of
publications that have perished. The campaign arguably originated in August
2015, when a “discussion” paper authored by Winnipeg media consultant Ken
Goldstein provocatively predicted that by 2025 “there will be few, if any,
printed daily newspapers” left in Canada. The paper did not disclose its
genesis, purpose, or funding. The website of Goldstein’s consulting firm
Communic@tions Management Inc. states that “most of the company’s work is
proprietary for its clients.” A former Canwest vice-president and chief
strategy officer, Goldstein has since authored and posted online a series of
papers predicting the demise of Canadian media and urging government assistance
for it, such as “Requiem for the Print Edition” (2017) and “Supporting Canadian
Journalism” (2019). His 2015 paper, “Canada’s Digital Divides” took downward
circulation trends and simply forecast them to continue until circulation fell
to between 5-10 percent of households by 2025. “To the extent that the trend
lines are realistic, we do not believe that a viable print business model
exists for most general interest daily newspapers once paid circulation drops
below 10% of Canadian households.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn11" name="_ftnref11" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn11;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[11]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a> Despite
apparently not being presented publicly, the paper attracted news coverage from
the National Post in a report that was reprinted in 19 other Postmedia dailies.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn12" name="_ftnref12" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn12;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[12]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
The report was also covered in Marketing magazine and Poynter Online, the
website of the Florida-based Poynter Institute, which is dedicated to
journalism research and education.<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn13" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn13;" title="">[13]</a></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn13" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn13;" title=""><!--[endif]--></a></span><o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
While the Standing
Heritage Committee held hearings on Media and Local Communities, yet
unconnected to them, a report was prepared for the Heritage Ministry by the
Public<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Policy Forum, a
“think tank” headed by former Globe and Mail editor Edward Greenspon. It was
reportedly funded by $200,000 from the ministry and also received funding from
several corporations. The report, titled The Shattered Mirror, claimed that
Postmedia had lost $352 million in its most recent fiscal year. That was an
accounting loss only on paper, however, achieved after deducting a $367 million
“impairment” charge that reflected Postmedia’s reduced value as a business,
plus other extraordinary expenses. On an operating basis, Postmedia instead
earned $82 million in 2015-16 on revenues of $877 million for a profit margin
of 9.3 percent. Of that, however, $72 million went to servicing its debt, which
was held mostly by its U.S. hedge fund owners, which had accumulated it for
pennies on the dollar while Canwest was facing bankruptcy.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The Shattered Mirror
pointed out that six Canadian dailies had been closed, merged or changed
publication frequency in 2016. They included the Guelph Mercury and five small
town dailies in B.C. and Alberta, only one of which was actually closed. Four
of the five were owned by the B.C. chains Black Press and Glacier Media, which
had been buying, selling, trading and closing community newspapers in a
real-life game of Monopoly since 2010. In total, Black and Glacier had closed
19 of the 33 newspapers they exchanged. Of the seven paid circulation dailies
that had been closed in Canada so far in the decade, six had been folded by
Black or Glacier. As a result, Black Press owned all but one of the newspapers
on Vancouver Island, which is the size and population of <span style="text-indent: 0in;">New Brunswick.</span><span style="text-indent: 0in;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn14" name="_ftnref14" style="text-indent: 0in;" title="">[14]</a></span></span><br />
<span style="text-indent: 0in;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The Shattered Mirror
also included a map showing that 169 “news outlets” had closed or merged across
Canada since 2008. It cited as its source the Local News Research Project,
which had commenced the previous year at Ryerson University and used <span style="text-indent: 0in;">“crowdsourcing” as a
methodology. Later in the report it was claimed there had been 225 weekly and
27 daily newspapers lost to closure or merger since 2010, but no source was
offered for this claim. Going even further than Goldstein, The Shattered Mirror
predicted that newspaper sales would fall to only two percent of households by
2025, down from 18 percent in 2015 and 49 percent in 1995. The report thanked
Goldstein for being</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
“particularly
patient in helping us understand industry numbers.”<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn15" name="_ftnref15" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn15;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[15]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn16" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn16;" title="">[16]</a></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn16" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn16;" title=""><!--[endif]--></a></span><o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Carleton University
media economist Dwayne Winseck criticized the report as “badly flawed,” because
he claimed it “cherry-picks evidence and gooses the numbers” to make its case.
“The case that the authors of The Shattered Mirror make about the severity of
the crisis of journalism is impressive at first blush,” wrote Winseck on his
blog. “Ultimately, however, it is neither convincing nor credible.” Circulation
trends for daily newspapers, according to Winseck, were “not the catastrophe
that The Shattered Mirror makes them out to be.” Sales per household, he noted,
were increasingly less relevant as the number of households soared because
people increasingly chose to live alone. Winseck’s own analysis of newspaper
circulation data showed the report exaggerated the decline of newspapers
because it had “selectively chosen a measure that paints the worst-case scenario.”
(Emphasis in original.) The Shattered Mirror’s claim that between 12,000 and
14,000 journalism jobs had been lost since the 1990s, noted Winseck, was also
flawed because it relied on headlines and union data that “do a great job
chronicling jobs lost but a poor one at keeping track of those gained.”
Statistics Canada data, he pointed out, <span style="text-indent: 0in;">“depicts a wholly
different picture,” showing that the number of full-time journalists in Canada
actually increased from 10,000 in 1987 to 11,631 in 2015. “Once again
consistent with a pattern, the authors ignore this data completely.”</span><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%; text-indent: 0in;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn17" name="_ftnref17" style="text-indent: 0in;" title="">[17]</a></span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Winseck saw in The
Shattered Mirror a “willful refusal” to deal with media industry structures,
which were “wholly ignored” in the report. “These examples are not innocent.
They are part of a process of ‘threat inflation’ with the aim of buttressing
the case for the policy recommendations on offer.” While exaggerating some
threats, such as the online advertising dominance of digital giants Facebook and
Google, the report downplayed one major problem, noted Winseck. “The Shattered
Mirror also gives short shrift to the idea that media concentration and the
structure of the communication and media industries might be a significant
factor giving rise to the woes besetting the news media.” According to Winseck,
it was “folly to willingly turn a blind eye to high levels of media
concentration and the peculiar structure of the media industries in Canada”
because they “have had devastating impacts.” He also pointed out that the
country’s largest media companies were making profits about four times the
average of other Canadian industries.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
“These observations
are at odds with the story of doom and gloom [that] permeates The Shattered
Mirror.” Winseck noted that the report’s refusal to engage with media
concentration was not surprising given that many of those involved in producing
the report “have not just sat back and taken arm chair academic views on these
matters but have been leading cheerleaders for the processes of consolidation.”
He declined to identify the “cheerleaders,” instead urging readers to do their
own research. “The industrious reader need only consult the list of
acknowledgements to sort out who is who and draw their own conclusions. Given
all this, that media concentration wasn’t on the agenda is not surprising.”<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn18" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn18;" title="">[18]</a></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn18" title=""><!--[endif]--></a></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Pre-meditated murder<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Among the witnesses
who testified in late 2016 to the Parliamentary hearings chaired by<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Dr. Hedy Fry on
Media and Local Communities was Paul Godfrey, CEO of Postmedia<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Network. He warned
the hearings that without government assistance the situation in Canada’s
newspaper industry would get “uglier.” After Fry’s report urged government
assistance for news media, the industry group News Media Canada proposed
increasing the Canadian Periodical Fund, which already distributed $75 million
annually to assist community newspapers and magazines, by $275 million a year
to also assist dailies. After that was quickly rejected by Ottawa, the promised
ugliness followed in late 2017 when Postmedia and Torstar announced their trade
and closures. Most of the 41 traded and 37 closed titles were small market
community newspapers in Ontario, but they also included 24 Hours commuter
dailies in Winnipeg and Vancouver and Metro in Ottawa and Winnipeg, all of
which were closed. Postmedia acquired 22 community papers and the two Metro dailies
from Torstar and closed them all. Torstar acquired 15 community papers and the
two 24 Hours titles from Postmedia and closed all but four, including the paid dailies
Barrie Examiner, Orillia Packet and Times, and Northumberland Today (Jackson,
2017). That brought the number of paid circulation dailies in Canada to 80 and
the number of free circulation dailies to 10 (News Media Canada, 2018). When
questions about the deal arose, Torstar president Andrew MacLeod claimed the
companies had been “extraordinarily careful” not to share any knowledge about
their plans for the properties, while Postmedia CEO Paul Godfrey told CBC
television:<o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="text-indent: 0in;">We did not have any
idea what they were going to do and they didn’t have any idea. We understand
the … legal rules involving collusion and you can ask anybody from Torstar, you
can ask anybody from Postmedia.</span><span style="text-indent: 0in;"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn19" title="">[19]</a></span></span></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn19" title=""><!--[endif]--></a></span>The
Competition Bureau raided Postmedia and Torstar offices in early 2018, however,
after documents submitted to the Ontario Superior Court reportedly detailed a
written agreement called “Project Lebron.” According to the documents,
Postmedia and Torstar agreed not to compete for years in the markets they
vacated and even on which workers, almost 300 in total, would be terminated.
The investigation reportedly involved rare criminal provisions of the
Competition Act that provide for penalties of up to $25 million in fines and
fourteen years in prison for conspiracy to reduce competition.<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn20" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn20;" title="">[20]</a></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn20" title=""><!--[endif]--></a></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Torstar chairman
John Honderich wrote a column in October 2018 that resembled nothing less than
a ransom note. Under the headline “Where is Ottawa’s help for Canada’s
newspapers?”, it listed by name 25 defunct dailies and 112 closed community
newspapers for a total of 137 titles that had ceased publication in the
previous decade. Honderich posted the casualty list because he said he wanted
to know where the financial assistance was that Ottawa had promised. “One or
two exploratory talks have been held but there has yet to be even a request for
proposals,” he groused. “Maybe next year, we are told.” Honderich’s list of
dead newspapers brazenly included more than a dozen titles Torstar itself had
recently killed off after its 41-title swap with Postmedia, and almost two
dozen more it sent back the other way to be closed. Another two dozen community
newspapers on Honderich’s list were B.C. titles similarly closed or merged by
Black <span style="text-indent: 0in;">Press or Glacier
Media after their deals. Honderich’s list also included nine commuter tabloids,
whose number had proliferated in the mid-2000s under the successful model
pioneered worldwide by Swedish company Metro International. The model had been
in retreat everywhere, however, since the bursting of the print advertising bubble
at the 2008-09 recession typically left room for only one in each market.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The Local News
Research Project issued a report in 2019 which brought its count of dead
Canadian newspapers to 231 since 2008. “The Local News Map, a crowd-sourced
platform that tracks changes to local news outlets across the country,
documented the closing of 36 local free and subscription daily newspapers and
195 community papers over the past decade,” noted the report.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn21" name="_ftnref21" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn21;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[21]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
The map was posted on the project’s website, where visitors could report the
launch or closure of local news media outlets.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn22" name="_ftnref22" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn22;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[22]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a> A 2018 report
on the mounting total, which by then had topped 250, including 189 community
newspapers, noted that new publications were being created, but not at nearly
the rate they were being closed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Only 93 new outlets
have opened to fill the gaps left by these closures. A majority of the new
outlets were created by independent media owners, not well-known chains, and
they opened in 69 different communities, compared to 190 communities that have
had closures.<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn23" name="_ftnref23" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn23;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 198%;">[23]</span><!--[endif]--></span></a></blockquote>
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftn23" name="_ftnref23" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn23;" title=""><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[endif]--></span></a></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Goosing the numbers?<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Contradicting the
elevated estimates of newspaper mortality in Canada is the annual count kept by
a pair of industry groups which merged in 2017. The Canadian Community
Newspaper Association, which merged with Newspapers Canada to form News Media
Canada, has inventoried community newspapers since 2011, before which it
counted only its member titles. It annual listings showed there were only 10
fewer titles in 2017 than in 2011. The total fluctuated considerably in between,
however, as community newspapers tend to launch as well as close. Total
circulation in 2017 was 97.5 percent of the 2011 total, according to its count.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Table 1 Community
newspapers in Canada<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="TableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin-left: 70.1pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 0in 0in 0in; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 164px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 26.6pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Titles<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Circulation
(weekly)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2017<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
1,032<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
18,802,329<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2016<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
1,060<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
19,454,115<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2015<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
1,083<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
20,973,352<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2014<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
1,040<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
20,577,994<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 5;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2013<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
1,019<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
19,612,930<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 6;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2012<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
1,029<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
19,736,168<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.2pt; mso-yfti-irow: 7; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2011<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 36.85pt;" valign="top" width="49"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
1,042<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 52.5pt;" valign="top" width="70"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
19,312,842<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Source: Canadian
Community Newspaper Association/News Media Canada<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The number of daily
newspapers in Canada fell much more as a percentage of the total, but by far
the greatest mortality has been in free circulation dailies, the number of
which fell by almost half from 2008-11 and by more than half again from
2012-13.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Table 2 Daily
newspapers in Canada<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></span>Paid<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Free<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Total<o:p></o:p></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="TableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin-left: 70.1pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 0in 0in 0in; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 152px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 13.2pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2018<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
80<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
10<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
90<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2017<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
86<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
13<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
99<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2016<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
84<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
14<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
98<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2015<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
90<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
13<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
103<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.2pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4;">
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2014<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
92<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
13<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
105<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.2pt; mso-yfti-irow: 5;">
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2013<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
94<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
19<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
113<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.4pt; mso-yfti-irow: 6;">
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2012<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
96<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
29<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
125<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.4pt; mso-yfti-irow: 7;">
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2011<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
96<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
27<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
123<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 8;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2010<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
94<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
36<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
130<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 9;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2009<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
96<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
36<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
132<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.2pt; mso-yfti-irow: 10; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2008<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
98<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 31.3pt;" valign="top" width="42"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
47<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 17.45pt;" valign="top" width="23"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
145<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Source: Newspapers
Canada/News Media Canada<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Contradicting
predictions of impending newspaper mortality, if not extinction, are the
financial reports of their owning companies, which show them to be comfortably
profitable on an operating basis. Postmedia has been burdened with considerable
debt, but most of this is held by its hedge fund owners, which recently forgave
almost half of it to keep the company from going bankrupt. They exchanged the
debt for additional shares of ownership, which brought their equity position to
98 percent despite supposed foreign ownership limits of 25 percent. From $72
million in its 2015-16 fiscal year, the company’s debt payments have fallen to
more manageable totals of $32.7 million and<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
$25.7 million in the
last two years as its loans have been paid off and/or forgiven.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Table 3 Postmedia
earnings<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="TableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin-left: 35.05pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 0in 0in 0in; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 253px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 26.6pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Revenues<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
(millions)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Earnings
(millions)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Profit<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
margin%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2018<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
676<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
65.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
9.7<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.4pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2017<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
754<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
54.6<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
7.2<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.4pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2016<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
877<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
82.3<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.4pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
9.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2015<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
750<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
111.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
14.8<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.2pt; mso-yfti-irow: 5; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2014<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
674<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
109.5<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
16.2<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
*fiscal year ending
August 31<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Torstar, the
publisher of Canada’s largest daily newspaper, the Toronto Star, also owns one
of the country’s largest community newspaper chains, Metroland Media Group
Ltd., and a handful of other daily newspapers, including the Hamilton Spectator.
Until 2014, it also owned the highly profitable Harlequin book publishing
company, which lessens the value of comparison with previous years.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Table 4 Torstar
earnings<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="TableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin-left: 35.05pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 0in 0in 0in; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 253px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 26.6pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Revenues
(millions)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Earnings
(millions)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 26.6pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Profit<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
margin%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2018<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
615<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
60.7<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
9.8<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2017<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
691<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
74.2<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
10.7<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.45pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2016<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
762<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
60.5<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.45pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
7.9<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 13.2pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 33.85pt;" valign="top" width="45"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
2015<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.65pt;" valign="top" width="76"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
843<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 56.5pt;" valign="top" width="75"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
66.8<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="height: 13.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 42.6pt;" valign="top" width="57"><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
7.9<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
The most recent
annual profit margins of Postmedia and Torstar are about double the historical
Fortune 500 average. Like all newspaper companies, their revenues and earnings
have been steadily falling as print advertising disappears, but a sufficient
core remains to sustain a smaller business, and online subscription revenues
have been rising to help make up for the lost ads. They have had to reduce
costs drastically, mostly by laying off journalists, which has undeniably
diminished news coverage.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<b>Conclusions<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
Recourse to publicly
available facts posted online shows the “crisis” in the Canadian newspaper
industry is not as severe as has been portrayed. The crisis in journalism, on
the other hand, while less quantifiable, is arguably more serious because the main
way newspapers have kept their heads above water financially has been to lay
off journalists. The practice of journalism in Canada may well warrant
government assistance, especially as emerging digital media outlets struggle to
find a viable business model. Whether newspapers chains, some of which are
foreign owned, should be given government money is more questionable,
especially since several are suspected of, and may even be charged with,
collusion to reduce competition.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="mso-element: footnote-list;">
<!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]-->
<br />
<div id="ftn1" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn1;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Ben H. Bagdikian, “The myth of newspaper poverty,” <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Columbia Journalism Review</i>, March/April 1973, 20.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="margin-bottom: 11.9pt;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn2;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[2]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> Ibid., 21.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn3" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn3;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[3]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Ibid., 23.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn4" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 7.85pt;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn4;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[4]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> Canada, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The uncertain mirror: Report of the Special
Senate Committee on Mass Media</i>, Vol. I. (Ottawa: Information Canada), 1970,
47.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn5" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="margin-bottom: 14.2pt;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn5;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[5]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> Ibid., 63.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn6" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref6" name="_ftn6" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn6;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[6]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Ben Bagdikian, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Media Monopoly. </i>Boston:
Beacon Press, 1983, 11.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn7" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="line-height: 115%;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref7" name="_ftn7" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn7;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[7]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> Canada, Standing Senate
Committee on Transport and Communication. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Interim
report on the Canadian news media</i>, 2004<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">.
</i>Ottawa: Senate of Canada.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn8" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="line-height: 111%; margin-bottom: 9.8pt; text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref8" name="_ftn8" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn8;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[8]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> H. Iris Chyi, Seth C.
Lewis, & Nan Zheng, “A matter of life and death?” <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Journalism Studies 13</i>(3), 2012, 305-324.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn9" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="line-height: 113%; text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref9" name="_ftn9" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn9;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[9]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> Marc Edge, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death
of Newspapers</i>. Vancouver: New Star Books, 2014.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn10" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref10" name="_ftn10" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn10;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[10]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Allan Bartley, “The regulation of cross-media ownership: The life and short
times of PCO 2294,” <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Canadian Journal of
Communication 13</i>(2), 1988, 45-59.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn11" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref11" name="_ftn11" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn11;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[11]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Communications Management Inc., “Canada’s Digital Divides,” August 20, 2015, 6.
URL: mediacmi.com/downloads/CMI_Discussion_Paper_Digital_Divides_082015.pdf<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn12" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref12" name="_ftn12" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn12;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[12]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Michael Den Tandt, “‘No magic bullet’ in saving news,” <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">National Post</i>, September 22, 2015, p. A2.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn13" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref13" name="_ftn13" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn13;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[13]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Rick Edmonds, “An expert’s forecast -- Canada will have few if any print
newspapers by 2025,” Poynter Online, August 30, 2015 URL: <u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2015/an-experts-forecast-canadawill-have-few-if-any-print-newspapers-by-2025/</span></u>;
Chris Powell, “Publishers in a ‘10-year race’ against time and technology says
Winnipeg firm,” Marketing, September 2, 2015. URL:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="footnotedescription">
<u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">http://marketingmag.ca/media/most-print-newspaper-brands-will-be-obsolete-by-2025-report-155696/</span></u><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn14" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref14" name="_ftn14" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn14;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[14]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Marc Edge, “Conspiracy to commit murder? Canadian newspaper trades and
closures, 2010-17.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="footnotedescription">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Canadian
Journal of Media Studies 16</i>(1), 2018<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">.
</i>URL: <u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">http://cjms.fims.uwo.ca/issues/16-01/Edge.pdf</span></u><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn15" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref15" name="_ftn15" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn15;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[15]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Public Policy Forum, “The Shattered Mirror: News, Democracy and Trust in the
Digital Age,” January<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn16" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="margin-bottom: 7.35pt;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref16" name="_ftn16" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn16;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[16]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> , p. 103. URL<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 106%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">: </span><u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">https://shatteredmirror.ca/download-report</span></u><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn17" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="line-height: 113%;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref17" name="_ftn17" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn17;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[17]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> Dwayne Winseck, “Shattered
Mirror, Stunted Vision and Squandered Opportunities,” Mediamorphis, February 9,
2017. URL: <u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">https://dwmw.wordpress.com/2017/02/09/shattered-mirror-stunted-vision-and-asquandered-opportunities/</span></u><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn18" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref18" name="_ftn18" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn18;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[18]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Ibid.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn19" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref19" name="_ftn19" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn19;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[19]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
David Milstead, “Torstar, Postmedia and the arrogance of the deal,” <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Globe and Mail</i>, March 23, 2018, p. B4.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn20" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="line-height: 125%; margin-right: 4.2pt;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref20" name="_ftn20" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn20;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[20]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> Susan Krashinsky
Robertson, “Torstar, Postmedia talked job cuts before deal, Competition Bureau
says.” <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Globe and Mail</i>, March 23,
2018, p. A1.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn21" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription" style="line-height: 111%; margin-bottom: 6.15pt;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref21" name="_ftn21" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn21;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[21]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> April Lindgren, Brent
Jolly, Cara Sabatini and Christina Wong, “Good news, bad news: A snapshot of
conditions at small-market newspapers in Canada,” May 1, 2019. URL: <u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">http://portal.journalism.ryerson.ca/goodnewsbadnews/</span></u><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn22" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref22" name="_ftn22" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn22;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[22]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
Ilina Ghosh, “Crowd-sourced map tracks what’s happening to local news outlets
across Canada.” JSource.ca, June 14, 2016. URL: <u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">http://www.j-source.ca/article/crowd-sourced-map-trackswhat%E2%80%99s-happening-local-news-outlets-across-canada</span></u><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn23" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="footnotedescription">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3624785028318420192#_ftnref23" name="_ftn23" style="mso-footnote-id: ftn23;" title=""><span class="footnotemark"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="footnotemark"><span style="font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 198%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[23]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
H.G. Watson, “Over 250 Canadian news media outlets have closed in the last 10
years.” J-Source.ca, October 4, 2018, URL: <u style="text-underline: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">http://j-source.ca/article/over-250-canadian-news-media-outlets-have-closed-in-thelast-ten-years/</span></u><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
<br />Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-90326794556725824412018-10-12T06:34:00.001-07:002019-11-15T22:38:22.925-08:00Newspaper chains demand ransom from Ottawa<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12.0pt;">
Canada’s
largest newspaper chains seem locked in a bizarre standoff with the federal
government, demanding financial assistance while killing off community newspapers
as if they were hostages. A major round of executions came <a href="https://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2017/11/27/Postmedia-Torstar-Media-Monopolies/" target="_blank">almost a year ago,</a><b> </b>when Postmedia Network and Torstar Corp. traded 41 mostly Ontario
titles and closed 37 of them. The occasion of “Newspaper Week” saw Torstar
chair John Honderich author a column on Tuesday that resembled nothing less
than a ransom note. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12.0pt;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Under the headline <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/10/09/where-is-ottawas-help-for-canadas-newspapers.html" target="_blank">“Where is Ottawa’s help for Canada’s newspapers?,”</a><b> </b>it listed 25 defunct dailies and 112 closed community newspapers for a
total of 137 titles that have ceased publication in the past decade. Honderich
wanted to know where the money is that Ottawa promised in February’s budget to assist Canadian journalism. “One or two exploratory talks have been held but there has yet to
be even a request for proposals,” he groused. “Maybe next year, we are told.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12.0pt;">
On closer inspection, however, Honderich’s
list of dead papers doesn’t pass the laugh test. It includes more
than a dozen titles Torstar killed off after its swap last year with Postmedia,
and almost two dozen more it sent back the other way to be euthanized. Executives of
both companies swore up and down they had no idea the other planned to close
the newspapers they traded, but their denials were never convincing. The
Competition Bureau soon came knocking with search warrants issued as part of
its investigation on rare criminal charges of conspiracy. Documents submitted
to the Ontario Superior Court to obtain the search warrants detailed a
written agreement dubbed “Project Lebron” after the basketball star. In them, Postmedia
and Torstar reportedly agreed not to compete for years in the markets they
vacated and even on the almost 300 workers who would get the axe. The companies
and their executives are now facing the possibility of charges that could bring
$25 million in fines and <a href="https://business.financialpost.com/telecom/media/competition-bureaus-concerns-over-postmedia-torstar-newspaper-swap-revealed-in-court-filing" target="_blank">14 years in prison. </a><b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12.0pt;">
Two dozen more community
newspapers on Honderich’s list were B.C. titles closed or merged this decade by
Black Press or Glacier Media. The provincial chains provided the template for
Postmedia and Torstar by trading almost three dozen titles between them from
2010-14, then closing most of them<a href="http://futureoflocalnews.org/portfolio-item/death-by-natural-causes-or-premeditated-murder-b-c-chains-eliminate-competition-by-buying-trading-and-closing-newspapers/" target="_blank"><b> </b>to eliminate local competition.</a> Of the 13 paid circulation dailies lost in Canada
from 2010-16, nine were killed by Glacier or Black Press (no relation to
Conrad). Their dealings somehow avoided the Competition Bureau’s notice,
perhaps due to them being out of mind way out on the west coast. This no doubt
emboldened Postmedia and Torstar, who may still be able to use the regulatory
inaction as a precedent to allow their collusive closures.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12.0pt;">
</div>
<div class="loose">
Honderich’s list of defunct dailies also includes a number of
freebies that once littered our porches and transit stations unbidden, such as
the Peace Arch Daily News in tiny tourist town White Rock, B.C., which briefly circulated 3,700 copies from
Tuesdays to Fridays before retreating to twice weekly publication in 2014. Nine were commuter dailies which
proliferated a dozen years ago under the successful model pioneered worldwide
by Swedish company Metro International. Metro editions sprang up from coast to
coast in Canada
in partnership with Torstar, which recently rebranded the survivors StarMetro.
Quebecor responded by launching 24 Hours papers in numerous cities and
now-defunct Canwest countered with its short-lived but hilariously titled Dose.
The model has been in retreat everywhere since the bursting of the print
advertising bubble a decade ago left room for only one in each market. Last
year Torstar traded Metro Ottawa and Metro Winnipeg to <span class="hit">Postmedia
and got back </span>24 Hours Toronto
and 24 Hours Vancouver, all of
which were closed. Yet according to Honderich we are supposed to lament their
passing, along with those of 24 Hours Calgary,
24 Hours Edmonton, Metro London, Metro
Regina and Metro Saskatoon, as some great loss to democracy. Puh-lease.</div>
<div class="loose">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Honderich’s count of 112 closed community newspapers at
least comes with names, unlike others who have come up with <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/over-250-canadian-news-media-outlets-have-closed-in-the-last-ten-years/" target="_blank">inflated totals</a><b> </b>by using the questionable research method of “crowdsourcing.” It almost seems
like an industry campaign to railroad Ottawa
into a bailout. But for those who have studied Canada’s
newspaper industry intently, a bad odor emerges. “This is such a distortion of
facts that it isn’t funny,” blogged Ontario
author Alexandra Kitty <a href="https://www.alexandrakitty.com/alexandra-kitty/2018/10/10/starting-over-in-a-post-journalism-world-part-forty-one" target="_blank">in response to Honderich’s list.</a><b> </b>A former community newspaper journalist and author of the brilliant new book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/When-Journalism-Thing-Alexandra-Kitty/dp/1785356542" target="_blank">When Journalism Was a Thing</a>, which is<b> </b>a compendium of corporate crimes against the craft, Kitty knows from personal experience that most
of the defunct small-town newspapers hardly churned out quality journalism.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The stories in those local newspapers were happy, happy soft
news junk. It is not as if local papers were in the habit of uncovering real
items. They covered photo ops of local corrupt politicians. They never bothered
pointing out the open affairs they were having and how they rewarded their
mistresses with patronage appointments, for instance.</blockquote>
But what Honderich and others who
inflate the magnitude of Canada’s
newspaper shakeout ignore is that not only do they close, but in the normal course of events they start up as
well. The <a href="https://nmc-mic.ca/about-newspapers/circulation/community-newspaper-snapshot/" target="_blank">annual count</a> kept scrupulously by the Canadian Community Newspaper
Association shows there were only 10 fewer titles last year than there were in
2011, before which it counted only its member titles. The total fluctuated
considerably in between, however, as community newspapers tend to come and go. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12.0pt;">
<b> Community newspapers in Canada</b>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none; margin-left: 1.0in; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext; mso-border-insidev: .5pt solid windowtext; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 480;">
<tbody>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-left: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
Titles</div>
</td>
<td style="border-left: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
Circulation</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
(weekly)</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
2017</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,032</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
18,802,329</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
2016</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,060</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
19,454,115</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
2015</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,083</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
20,973,352</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 4;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
2014</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,040</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
20,577,994</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 5;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
2013</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,019</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
19,612,930</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 6;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
2012</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,029</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
19,736,168</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 7; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
2011</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
1,042</div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;" valign="top"><div class="MsoNormal">
19,312,842</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12.0pt;">
At least, they tend to come and go unless
you allow corporate collusion and non-compete agreements. Then they only go
away, along with competition.</div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:ApplyBreakingRules/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoTableGrid
{mso-style-name:"Table Grid";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;
mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-border-insideh:.5pt solid windowtext;
mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-25622442777389456442018-06-06T18:18:00.000-07:002018-06-07T22:57:06.967-07:00Media change denial is not like climate change denial<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Rasmus Kleis Nielsen provocatively assails those he calls “<a href="http://www.niemanlab.org/2018/05/media-change-deniers-why-debates-around-news-need-a-better-evidence-base-and-how-we-can-get-one/" target="_blank">media change deniers</a>” by comparing us to the natural scientists who, despite overwhelming
evidence, refuse to go along with the consensus on global warming. The insulting inference is that those of us who take
a contrary view from the mainstream of media researchers are similarly – as the illustration which accompanied his polemic on the NiemanLab website reinforces – deaf, dumb and blind. NiemanLab has refused to run my reply, which is why I post it here. The gist of Nielsen’s
argument is that those who swim against the current should refrain from making
assertions without data to support their positions. By doing so, he asserts,
they are “doubling down on arguments that are directly contradicted by a
growing consensus in the best available peer-reviewed scientific research.” He
then adds parenthetically: “Don’t get me started on whether print ‘has a future’
or the notion that linear scheduled television is doing just fine.”</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RA_Yv5Gvm4Y/WxiFyD5mx6I/AAAAAAAAAtI/NDrLxWcctYkht5IVrxY8RR2Q4hOBHqf8ACLcBGAs/s1600/see-speak-hear-no-evil-cc.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1036" data-original-width="1600" height="258" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RA_Yv5Gvm4Y/WxiFyD5mx6I/AAAAAAAAAtI/NDrLxWcctYkht5IVrxY8RR2Q4hOBHqf8ACLcBGAs/s400/see-speak-hear-no-evil-cc.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">If you can't sufficiently insult dissenters with words, try using pictures like this</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">As I have done no research on linear scheduled television, I
will focus in answering Professor Nielsen on whether print has a future. I submit
that he needs to get out from under his own filter bubble and consider data-based,
peer-reviewed research of which he is either unaware or perhaps simply ignores
because it contradicts his cocksure consensus. I would argue that considering
different types of data is important in researching a question in order to get
different perspectives and thus a better grasp on it.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Take the future of print. The overwhelming consensus, of
course, is that print is dying. Even supposedly skeptical scholars assume as
much simply from reading headlines that tell of falling newspaper circulations,
multi-million-dollar corporate losses, mass layoffs of journalists, and even
the bankruptcy of numerous newspaper chains. Failing to understand how the
newspaper business works, and having no inkling of the arcane rules of
accounting, they neglect to look under the hood to diagnose what is really going
on. That is what I did for my 2014 book <i>Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of the
Death of Newspapers</i>, (<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://marcedge.com/Greatly_Exaggerated_5e.pdf" target="_blank">PDF</a></span>) which was based on data published that same year in the peer-reviewed
and A-ranked <i>Newspaper Research Journal</i>. (<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.marcedge.com/NRJEdge.pdf" target="_blank">PDF</a></span>) I’ve had lots of reviews written of my books, but never before one of a journal article I had written. The <i>European Journalism Observatory </i><a href="https://en.ejo.ch/media-economics/business-models/north-american-newspapers-still-profitable" target="_blank">took note of this one</a>, but perhaps that didn’t register in the hallowed halls of Oxford, where Nielsen is Director of Research for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. I even took them a copy of my book the last time I was in town, but I guess it somehow fell through the cracks.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I looked at the financial statements of all publicly-traded
newspaper companies in the U.S.
and Canada from
2006-2013, a period during which print advertising revenues fell by 62 percent
in the former and 36 percent in the latter. (They have continued to fall.) Using
the standard profitability measure of EBITDA – earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation, and amortization – I found that despite this shock to their
business model, none of the chains suffered an annual loss in any year during
this period. Most were still making double-digit profit margins in 2013. Some had
profits as high as 20 percent. It turns out those multi-million dollar losses
the headlines reported were mostly on paper, as under standard accounting rules
companies may deduct from their operating profits the reduced value of their
business as an “extraordinary” loss. The newspaper chains that went bankrupt
were actually among the most profitable. They only went broke because their
owners took on too much debt in making acquisitions before the advertising
bubble burst and they were unable to service that debt with reduced revenues.
Their newspapers, being profitable, continued publishing throughout and emerged
on the other side under new ownership. Unfortunately they often went to cagy
hedge funds which had bought up their distressed debt for pennies on the dollar
and are now squeezing them for everything they’re worth.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Their shrinking circulations and the mass layoff of
journalists are newspapers’ way of coping with reduced advertising revenues.
Newspapers counter-intuitively lose money on every copy sold, so printing more
and trucking them farther and wider now makes little sense. They more than make
up the difference, of course, by selling advertising, for which there remains
sufficient demand to keep their core business well above water. Most of their
needed cost cutting, unfortunately, has involved throwing journalists
overboard. This is undeniably bad, but the “adapt or die” meme that emerged a
decade ago after a few second-place dailies folded has seen newspapers stubbornly
survive. Most have sought more revenues from readers by boosting their cover
prices and erecting paywalls that require payment for digital access.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">More recently I have focused on <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/emma.pdf" target="_blank">UK newspaper companies</a> with similar but more varied results. Some titles, such as
the venerable <i>Times</i>, lost money for years before bringing in the paywall, which
has put them in the black. At the <i>Guardian</i>, they simply asked readers to send
them money while keeping online content free. Millions of pounds have since
poured in, all but assuring its future. Other researchers have found rich
datasets that corroborate my findings, such as Keith Herndon in a forthcoming <i><a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/home/nrj" target="_blank">Newspaper Research Journal</a></i> article and <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/16522354.2017.1290024?journalCode=romb20" target="_blank">Miriam van der Burg</a> in her recent <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322343269_Consolidation_of_ownership_in_media_industries_Survival_strategies_of_newspaper_publishers_and_regulation_in_the_digital_era" target="_blank">dissertation</a> on
the Belgian newspaper industry. Iris Chyi and Ori Tenenboim of the University
of Texas recently found that the 25
largest U.S.
dailies more than doubled their subscription prices on average between 2008 and
2016, with the price increases accelerating after 2012.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The French have a saying: <i>Plus ça change, plus c'est la même
chose</i>, which translates as “the more things change, the more they stay the same.”
Media are undeniably changing. It would be folly to claim otherwise. The
question is how radically the media landscape will change, ie. whether the
future will be online only or if print and broadcasting will endure. Empirical
evidence is mounting to support the latter conclusion, at least as far as print
is concerned, however unpalatable that may be to digital usurpers like Nielsen.
For him to better foresee the future will require him to broaden his
perspective. </span></div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-30640472669147142062017-04-02T01:06:00.000-07:002020-03-16T05:11:07.649-07:00A letter to the Globe and Mail (not published)<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:ApplyBreakingRules/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Re When local news outlets shutter due to cuts, we all lose
(April 1):<br />
<br />
Elizabeth Renzetti quotes as follows from the Public Policy Forum’s
recent report The Shattered Mirror. “Since 2010, there have been 225 weekly and
27 daily newspapers lost to closure or merger.” This does not accord with my
research or with data gathered by Newspapers Canada, which show that the number
of non-daily newspapers actually rose by 18 from 2011 to 2016. The number of
paid daily newspapers, which I study closely, has fallen by eight since 2010.
Six of those closures or mergers were by two B.C. chains that have been buying,
selling, and even trading newspapers back and forth, then often closing them to
reduce competition. The recently-closed Surrey Leader is the 20th newspaper
lost since 2010 as a result of these dealings by Glacier Media and Black Press.
The federal Competition Bureau seems not to have noticed. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Marc Edge, Ph.D.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
University of Malta<br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE:</b><br />
<div class="gE iv gt" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; cursor: pointer; font-family: Roboto, RobotoDraft, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 0.875rem; padding: 20px 0px 0px;">
<table cellpadding="0" class="cf gJ" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; border-collapse: collapse; display: block; font-size: 0.875rem; letter-spacing: 0.2px; margin-top: 0px; width: auto;"><tbody style="display: block;">
<tr class="acZ" style="display: flex; height: auto;"><td class="gF gK" style="display: block; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; max-height: 20px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: top; white-space: nowrap; width: 358.692px;"><table cellpadding="0" class="cf ix" style="border-collapse: collapse; table-layout: fixed; width: 358.4px;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="c2" style="display: flex; margin: 0px;"><h3 class="iw" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: auto; color: #5f6368; font-size: 0.75rem; font-weight: inherit; letter-spacing: 0.3px; line-height: 20px; margin: inherit; max-width: calc(100% - 8px); overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;">
<span class="qu" role="gridcell" tabindex="-1"><span class="gD" data-hovercard-id="SStead@globeandmail.com" data-hovercard-owner-id="126" email="SStead@globeandmail.com" name="Stead, Sylvia" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; color: #202124; display: inline; font-size: 0.875rem; font-weight: bold; letter-spacing: 0.2px; line-height: 20px; vertical-align: top;">Stead, Sylvia</span> <span class="go" style="color: #555555; vertical-align: top;"><span aria-hidden="true"><</span>SStead@globeandmail.com<span aria-hidden="true">></span></span></span></h3>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</td><td class="gH bAk" style="align-items: center; color: #222222; display: block; margin: 0px; max-height: 20px; text-align: right; vertical-align: top; white-space: nowrap;"><div class="gK" style="align-items: center; display: flex; padding: 0px;">
<span alt="3 Apr 2017, 19:59" class="g3" id=":rf" role="gridcell" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: auto; color: #5f6368; display: block; font-size: 0.75rem; letter-spacing: 0.3px; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; vertical-align: top;" tabindex="-1" title="3 Apr 2017, 19:59">Mon, 3 Apr 2017, 19:59</span><div aria-checked="false" aria-label="Not starred" class="zd bi4" jslog="20511; u014N:cOuCgd,Kr2w4b;" role="checkbox" style="cursor: pointer; display: inline-block; height: 20px; margin-left: 20px; outline: 0px; user-select: none;" tabindex="0" title="Not starred">
<span class="T-KT" style="align-items: center; border: none; display: inline-flex; height: 20px; justify-content: center; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 0px; position: relative; text-align: center; top: 0px; transition: opacity 0.15s cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 0.2, 1) 0s; width: 20px; z-index: 0;"></span></div>
</div>
</td><td class="gH" style="align-items: center; color: #222222; display: flex; margin: 0px; text-align: right; vertical-align: top; white-space: nowrap;"></td><td class="gH acX bAm" rowspan="2" style="align-items: center; color: #222222; display: block; margin: 0px; max-height: 20px; text-align: right; vertical-align: top; white-space: nowrap;"><div aria-label="Reply" class="T-I J-J5-Ji T-I-Js-IF aaq T-I-ax7 L3" data-tooltip="Reply" role="button" style="-webkit-user-drag: none; align-items: center; background: transparent; border-radius: 2px 0px 0px 2px; border: none; box-shadow: none; color: #444444; cursor: pointer; display: inline-flex; font-size: 0.875rem; height: 20px; justify-content: center; line-height: 18px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; min-width: 0px; outline: none; padding: 0px; position: relative; text-align: center; user-select: none; z-index: 0;" tabindex="0">
<img alt="" class="hB T-I-J3 " role="button" src="https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/images/cleardot.gif" style="background: url("https://www.gstatic.com/images/icons/material/system/2x/reply_black_20dp.png") center center / 20px no-repeat; display: inline-block; height: 20px; margin: 0px; opacity: 0.54; padding: 0px; transition: opacity 0.15s cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 0.2, 1) 0s; vertical-align: middle; width: 20px;" /></div>
<div aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" aria-label="More" class="T-I J-J5-Ji T-I-Js-Gs aap T-I-awG T-I-ax7 L3" data-tooltip="More" id=":10s" role="button" style="-webkit-user-drag: none; align-items: center; background: transparent; border-radius: 0px 2px 2px 0px; border: none; box-shadow: none; color: #444444; cursor: pointer; display: inline-flex; font-size: 0.875rem; height: 20px; justify-content: center; line-height: 18px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; min-width: 0px; outline: none; padding: 0px; position: relative; text-align: center; user-select: none; z-index: 0;" tabindex="0">
<img alt="" class="hA T-I-J3" role="menu" src="https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/images/cleardot.gif" style="background: url("https://www.gstatic.com/images/icons/material/system/2x/more_vert_black_20dp.png") center center / 20px no-repeat; display: inline-block; height: 20px; margin: 0px; opacity: 0.54; padding: 0px; transition: opacity 0.15s cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 0.2, 1) 0s; vertical-align: middle; width: 20px;" /></div>
</td></tr>
<tr class="acZ xD" style="display: flex; height: auto;"><td colspan="3" style="margin: 0px;"><table cellpadding="0" class="cf adz" style="border-collapse: collapse; table-layout: fixed; white-space: nowrap; width: 608px;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="ady" style="align-items: center; display: flex; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; overflow: visible; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><div class="iw ajw" style="display: inline-block; max-width: 92%; overflow: hidden;">
<span class="hb" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: auto; color: #5f6368; font-size: 0.75rem; letter-spacing: 0.3px; line-height: 20px; vertical-align: top;">to <span class="g2" data-hovercard-id="marc.edge@um.edu.mt" data-hovercard-owner-id="126" dir="ltr" email="marc.edge@um.edu.mt" name="me" style="vertical-align: top;">me</span></span></div>
<div aria-haspopup="true" aria-label="Show details" class="ajy" data-tooltip="Show details" id=":10t" role="button" style="align-items: center; border: none; display: inline-flex; justify-content: center; margin-left: 4px; outline: none; position: relative; vertical-align: top; z-index: 0;" tabindex="0">
<img alt="" class="ajz" src="https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/images/cleardot.gif" style="background: url("https://www.gstatic.com/images/icons/material/system/2x/arrow_drop_down_black_20dp.png") center center / 20px no-repeat; border: none; cursor: pointer; display: flex; height: 20px; margin: 0px 0px 0px auto; opacity: 0.54; padding: 0px; position: relative; right: 0px; top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 20px;" /></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div id=":10e" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, RobotoDraft, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;">
<div class="qQVYZb">
</div>
<div class="utdU2e">
</div>
<div class="lQs8Hd" jsaction="SN3rtf:rcuQ6b" jscontroller="i3Ohde">
</div>
<div class="btm">
</div>
</div>
<div class="" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Roboto, RobotoDraft, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;">
<div class="aHl" style="margin-left: -38px;">
</div>
<div id=":10u" tabindex="-1">
</div>
<div class="ii gt" id=":10g" style="direction: ltr; font-size: 0.875rem; margin: 8px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative;">
<div class="a3s aXjCH msg1645821260369942133" id=":10f" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: 1.5; overflow: hidden;">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_1645821260369942133WordSection1">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hello Dr. Edge:<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The reference is attributed to the Shattered Mirror report <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://shatteredmirror.ca/wp-content/uploads/theShatteredMirror.pdf&source=gmail&ust=1584446892743000&usg=AFQjCNFtWKpa8vObf5EUJs8XZ8CfEu4e_g" href="https://shatteredmirror.ca/wp-content/uploads/theShatteredMirror.pdf" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">https://shatteredmirror.ca/wp-<wbr></wbr>content/uploads/<wbr></wbr>theShatteredMirror.pdf</a><u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unfortunately Ms. Renzetti is currently on book leave, but I believe the figure is correct in that it came from this report. Perhaps their method of counting differs from yours.<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sylvia Stead<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Public Editor</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-67352726878300029482017-02-06T08:57:00.002-08:002022-12-06T11:37:26.883-08:00"Shattered" mirror more like a funhouse mirror<div class="MsoNormal">
A report on <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>’s
troubled news media released by the Public Policy Forum recently – titled <a href="https://shatteredmirror.ca/" target="_blank">The Shattered Mirror</a> – extends the reflective analogy used by Senator Keith Davey’s
study of mass media in 1970. “In the decades since Senator Davey declared the
media mirror ‘uncertain,’ it has cracked and now appears shattered,” states the
think tank headed by former journalist <a href="http://www.ppforum.ca/node/7301" target="_blank">Edward Greenspon</a>, which was <strike>hired </strike> contracted by Industry Canada and the
Heritage <strike>committee studying Media and Local Communities</strike> ministry. Yet the PPF report is more
like a funhouse mirror that grossly distorts reality in at least one key media industry.
Not only does it buy into the Big Lie that has surrounded newspapers for years
– that they are losing money and thus dying – the report seemingly does its
best to promote that myth. It repeats the canard that industry dominant
Postmedia Network is bleeding red ink by mentioning that the company lost $352 million
in its fiscal year ended last August 31. That’s only if you deduct a $267
million “impairment” charge that reflects the reduced value of Postmedia’s
business on paper, plus a raft of other extraordinary expenses such as the $42
million cost of severing staff. Otherwise, on a cash-in/cash-out basis, Postmedia
recorded operating earnings of $82 million on revenues of $877 million for a profit
margin of 9.3 percent, which sure beats buying bonds. What really dragged it
down, however, was the $72 million in interest payments the company had to make
on debt bizarrely held mostly by its <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
hedge fund owners. That piece of financial engineering more than anything is necessitating
Postmedia’s constant staff cuts and thus diminishing Canadian journalism. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-K2Nky507Zvs/WJizv1TBeOI/AAAAAAAAAno/1AEdQX35biQLcxbwVrSKNieN4VSncwQYgCLcB/s1600/shattered.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="198" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-K2Nky507Zvs/WJizv1TBeOI/AAAAAAAAAno/1AEdQX35biQLcxbwVrSKNieN4VSncwQYgCLcB/s320/shattered.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
The PPF report is silent on the problem of <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
hedge funds owning <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>’s
largest newspaper company, which was inexplicably allowed by the erstwhile
Harper government despite a supposed 25-percent limit on foreign ownership.
Postmedia then bought 175 of the 178 newspapers owned by Sun Media, Canada’s
second-largest newspaper company. That gave it both dailies in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>,
<st1:city>Calgary</st1:city>, <st1:city>Edmonton</st1:city>
and <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>, but the Competition
Bureau let the purchase stand because it somehow concluded those newspapers
didn’t compete anyway. Postmedia then merged the newsrooms of its duopoly
dailies in all four cities despite promising not to, effectively eliminating
daily newspaper competition there. The PPF report gives the Competition Bureau
a pass, noting only that it was “caught by surprise” by Postmedia’s broken
promises. The company’s dominance might not be apparent in <st1:city>Toronto</st1:city>,
where its Sun and National Post have competition from the Star and Globe &
Mail. In the three westernmost provinces, however, it has a stranglehold with 75
percent of paid daily circulation and eight of the nine largest dailies. We
wouldn’t be in this situation if <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>
enforced our foreign ownership and competition laws. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The report further perpetuates the newspaper death myth by pointing
out that six Canadian dailies were closed, merged or changed publication
frequency in 2016. Can you name them? I had to look it up. Most would guess the
Guelph Mercury, which was shuttered a year ago to some consternation. The other
five were small town dailies in B.C. and <st1:state>Alberta</st1:state>,
only one of which was actually closed. Four of them were owned by the B.C.
chains Black Press and Glacier Media, which have been carving up the province’s
community press between themselves unhindered for years. The chains have been
playing a real-life game of Monopoly since 2010, buying, selling and even trading
newspapers back and forth and then often closing them to reduce competition.
Black and Glacier have <a href="http://globalnews.ca/news/2488301/here-are-all-the-newspapers-in-b-c-that-have-shut-down-this-decade/" target="_blank">closed 19 of the newspapers they have exchanged</a>,
including non-dailies. More than half of the 15 newspapers the chains traded in
one 2014 deal were subsequently shuttered. Of the seven paid circulation
dailies that have died in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>
this decade through closure or merger (not lived on with a change in publication
frequency), six were killed by Black or Glacier. As a result, Black Press (no
connection to Conrad Black) now owns all but one of the newspapers on <st1:place>Vancouver
Island</st1:place>, which is the size and population of <st1:state>New
Brunswick</st1:state>. Has the Competition Bureau even noticed? <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But my favorite part of the report is where the PPF predicts
that newspaper sales will fall to only two per 100 households by 2025, down from
18 in 2015 and 49 in 1995. How it came up with that projection, other than by
using a lead weight, is beyond me. So ardently does the PPF promote the
newspaper death myth that the heading for this section screams “THE END MAY BE
IN SIGHT.” That may accord with the popular misconception, and with what the
late American media critic Ben Bagdikian called the “myth of newspaper
poverty,” which publishers on both sides of the border have promoted for
decades to their great regulatory benefit. It doesn’t accord with financial facts,
however, which I detail in my 2014 book <a href="http://www.straight.com/life/796356/marc-edges-greatly-exaggerated-reveals-why-death-newspapers-overstated" target="_blank">Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of theDeath of Newspapers</a>. Their revenues have undeniably fallen off a cliff in
recent years, but my research shows that no publicly-traded newspaper company in
the <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region> or <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>
suffered an annual loss on an operating basis between 2006 and 2013. That period
included their steepest revenue declines ever during the Great Recession of
2008-09. Newspapers will survive as long as they remain profitable, which they
show an uncanny ability to do. That’s because they are remarkably adaptable organizations
and are able to make themselves smaller in short order, unfortunately by mostly
throwing people overboard. This has weakened their journalism and endangered our
democracy. We need digital media to pick up the slack, but they find it hard to
compete for advertising revenue with Google and Facebook.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The PPF report makes some interesting suggestions for measures
to breathe life into <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>’s
flagging news media. Changes to the country’s antiquated laws on charitable
giving are badly needed to allow non-profit news media outlets to accept
tax-deductible donations, as they can in the <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
and other countries. The report’s suggestion of taxing Canadian companies that
advertise with the American digital giants, then using the proceeds to subsidize
Canadian news media, may be realistic depending on how it is done. Let’s hope
that Greenspon and his researchers are better informed in those areas than they
are on newspaper economics.</div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-26272423210903745032016-03-12T15:02:00.003-08:002016-03-12T19:10:30.050-08:00Canada’s chief media apologist sings the blues (to an American)<div class="MsoNormal">
Ken Goldstein dropped by the Poynter Institute recently. Who
knows what he was doing in <st1:place><st1:city>St. Petersburg</st1:city>, <st1:state>Florida</st1:state></st1:place>.
Maybe he was on vacation. After all, it’s c-c-cold this time of year in <st1:city>Winnipeg</st1:city>,
where Goldstein lives. Or maybe he was there at the behest of a client. His
firm Communic@tions Management Inc., <a href="http://media-cmi.com/" target="_blank">according to its website</a><b>
</b>“provides consulting advice in media economics, media
trends, and the impact of new technologies on the media.” <st1:stockticker>FULL</st1:stockticker>
DISCLOSURE: Goldstein and I have locked horns before, on the letters page of
the <i>Vancouver Sun</i> way back in 2002. He was then executive
vice-president and chief strategy officer of Canwest Global Communications,
which owned the <i>Sun</i> and most of the other major dailies in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>.
That was before its leadership ran Canwest into bankruptcy, forcing Goldstein
to hang out his shingle as a consultant. Back then my complaint was about a <i>Sun</i> column Goldstein wrote headlined “Newspapers’ dwindling role belies fears about
monopolies,” in which he argued that Canwest’s overweening influence was
nothing to worry about. You can see <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/sun%20letters.html" target="_blank">from the correspondence</a> that Goldstein made sure he got
the last word back then. That won’t happen now that I have a blog.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Id5jYCG8pQM/VuSf2YCDlTI/AAAAAAAAAh4/PaYjhZVL5U8XXUvLPwwxViWCFQfhOeq3w/s1600/WAB_photos_KenGoldstein.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Id5jYCG8pQM/VuSf2YCDlTI/AAAAAAAAAh4/PaYjhZVL5U8XXUvLPwwxViWCFQfhOeq3w/s320/WAB_photos_KenGoldstein.jpg" width="223" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ken Goldstein -- Canada's media "expert"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Down in <st1:city>St. Petersburg</st1:city>,
Goldstein got the ear of <a href="http://about.poynter.org/about-us/our-people/rick-edmonds" target="_blank">Rick Edmonds</a> during his visit
to Poynter’s campus. (Endowed by the late Nelson Poynter in the 1970s, the <a href="http://about.poynter.org/about-us/mission-history" target="_blank">Poynter Institute</a><b> </b>runs journalism
education programs, does much journalism research, and also publishes the <i>St.
Petersburg Times</i>.) <st1:city>Edmonds</st1:city> is a
media business analyst for Poynter and he co-authors its excellent annual <a href="http://www.journalism.org/2015/04/29/state-of-the-news-media-2015/" target="_blank">State of the News Media</a><b> </b>report.
So he’s fairly influential. You can see why Goldstein might want to tell him
all about the woes of Canadian media, or at least his (or his latest client’s) version
of them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
And what a tale of woe Goldstein spun. Postmedia Network, the
consortium of mostly U.S. hedge funds that took over the former Southam dailies
after Canwest went bankrupt, has been dealt a “nasty” hand. A faltering economy
and falling Canadian dollar have made it tough on the company because its enormous
debt is payable in U.S. dollars. No mention of that fact that much of its
high-interest debt is held by those very same U.S. owners, plus a Canadian
hedge fund that financed most of Postmedia’s $316-million purchase of 175
newspapers from Sun Media. <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/postmedia-faces-pivotal-moment/article26056170/" target="_blank">These hedge funds</a> are sucking the company dry as a result, all the while
complaining about how tough times are.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to the headline on <st1:city>Edmonds</st1:city>’
<a href="http://www.poynter.org/2016/oh-canada-where-business-model-woes-are-running-off-the-charts/400051/" target="_blank">account of what Goldstein told him,</a><b> </b>“business model woes are running off the charts” up here as far as media
companies are concerned. Things are so bad for Postmedia that it has been
forced to implement “waves of layoffs and consolidations, some of the most
draconian this January.” No mention of the contentious newsroom mergers at its
dailies in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>, <st1:city>Calgary</st1:city>,
<st1:city>Edmonton</st1:city>, and <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>,
which have now prompted <a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/Committees/en/CHPC/StudyActivity?studyActivityId=8800976" target="_blank">federal hearings.</a> No, the way Edmonds understood it from Goldstein, the newsrooms in those
cities were “nearly halved and asked to produce separate reports for the two
titles Postmedia owns in each market.” Well, that sounds a lot better than newsrooms
being merged.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
Government, according to what Goldstein told <st1:city>Edmonds</st1:city>,
is a “complicating factor” in Canadian media, what with the state-owned broadcaster CBC
providing competition for the private sector. “And a Competition Bureau
regularly considers whether to rein in concentration at the biggest chains.”
Yeah, then it lies down <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2016/01/23/Postmedia-Crisis-Competition-Bureau/" target="_blank">until the feeling passes.</a> Some complication.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
This promotion of the woes besetting newspapers in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>
is nothing new for Goldstein. Last summer, <strike>mere weeks before</strike> after Postmedia bought
the Sun Media dailies (surely just a coincidence), Goldstein issued a dire warning. By simply projecting current
trends to continue downward (which rarely happens), he predicted that within a
decade “there will be few, if any, printed daily newspapers” left in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>.
<st1:city>Edmonds</st1:city> also picked up on that <a href="http://www.poynter.org/2015/an-experts-forecast-canada-will-have-few-if-any-print-newspapers-by-2025/368793/" target="_blank">“expert” forecast.</a> Except that such predictions were rampant in the <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
following the collapse of newspaper classified advertising there during the
2007-09 recession. Among major dailies, only a flagging few folded. No major
newspaper in <st1:place>North America</st1:place> has ceased publication since
2009 despite all the dire predictions, as I chronicle in my 2014 book <i><a href="http://www.straight.com/life/796356/marc-edges-greatly-exaggerated-reveals-why-death-newspapers-overstated" target="_blank">Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death of Newspapers.</a> </i>The biggest threat is not so much to newspapers, which from the company
financials I have examined are still profitable. The threat is to companies
like Postmedia which own newspapers but are heavily loaded with debt which they may soon have
problems paying off if their revenues keep falling. Newspapers are remarkably
resilient, as has been amply demonstrated,
because they can quickly downsize by cutting staff and other costs. They will
thus continue publishing. They may have different owners, however. In the case of
Postmedia, that would be a blessing.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
But wait, it gets better . . . I mean worse. Things are just as bad in Canadian television, according to what
Goldstein told <st1:city>Edmonds</st1:city>. “TV
stations in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>
are in roughly the same bad shape as newspapers. . . . Canadian local
stations don’t have the saving grace of huge political advertising revenues and
rising retransmission fees, which have kept TV so prosperous here.” No, we
actually didn’t have a federal election last fall, with lots of advertising on
TV. And remember those retransmission fees, which the networks campaigned so
hard a few years ago to get the government to force the cable and satellite
companies to pay them? As I chronicle in <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/mcs.pdf" target="_blank">this article,</a> it took the networks several tries, and a
barrage of “Save Local TV” commercials, to get the right to negotiate
retransmission fees. They sang the blues, claiming they were losing hundreds of
millions of dollars, except that they weren’t, as <a href="http://www.j-source.ca/article/ctv-operating-profits-and-job-losses" target="_blank">one enterprising blogger discovered.</a> But almost as soon as they won the war, the networks were taken over by those
very same cable and satellite companies that were making even more money than
the networks. This is the disastrous legacy of convergence, which 16 years ago saw
newspaper and television companies frantically partner in a fruitless quest for
ever-greater profits. Since it all collapsed, CTV is now owned by <st1:city>Bell</st1:city>,
Global by Shaw, and <st1:stockticker>CITY</st1:stockticker> by <st1:city>Rogers</st1:city>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But here’s my favorite line from <st1:city>Edmond</st1:city>s’ account of his meeting with <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>’s
media guru. “Goldstein told me that the four private stations in his home town
of <st1:city>Winnipeg</st1:city> have collectively lost
money each of the last nine years.” I think this one proves the old saw about
how to lie with statistics. I am surprised to hear that there are four private
stations in <st1:city>Winnipeg</st1:city>, as we only
have three private networks, so I suspect there is a cable access channel in there bringing down the average. If you instead prefer hard data, as I do, luckily
the CRTC keeps a close eye on broadcasting company financials. You will see
from its latest annual monitoring report that the television networks are doing
<a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2015/cmr4.htm#t40" target="_blank">quite nicely.</a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, keep it up Ken. You’re doing a great job of twisting the
facts to the advantage of <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>’s
bloated media companies. Good thing nobody’s watching.</div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-88709817202723909082016-02-23T10:14:00.002-08:002016-03-07T20:50:08.831-08:00A letter the National Post won't publish<div class="MsoNormal">
Re: Government to the newspaper industry’s rescue?
No thanks, Feb. 6<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I have been <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/terence-corcoran-government-to-the-newspaper-industrys-rescue-no-thanks" target="_blank">nominated by Terence Corcoran</a> for an award he
calls the Most Pompously Wrongheaded Argument for a Government Bailout of the
Newspaper Industry. My nomination cannot stand, however, because I am actually
opposed to government subsidies for <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>'s
press. Mr. Corcoran quoted me from a CBC panel discussion as pointing
out that Scandinavian countries are highly ranked for press freedom despite
subsidizing their press, but he ignored the following quote: “I have to agree
with Lorne [Gunter], that most self-respecting journalists would not want to
see government funding.” Mr. Corcoran is also incorrect when he states that the
1969 Davey commission on the media proposed a Press Ownership Review Board that
would have issued licences and guidelines. The Davey report made no mention of
licensing, which is anathema to press freedom. The proposed Press Ownership
Review Board, similar to one in the <st1:country-region>United
Kingdom</st1:country-region>, was to approve – or, more likely,
disapprove – newspaper sales or mergers. Such a board’s basic guideline,
according to the report, would have been that “all transactions that increase
concentration of ownership in the mass media are undesirable and contrary to
the public interest – unless shown to be otherwise.” Mr. Corcoran’s opinions
might carry more weight if he could get his facts straight.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Marc Edge<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
University <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>
West<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city></div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-54931707958221207912016-02-23T10:09:00.000-08:002016-05-01T12:36:35.248-07:00Postmedia’s promises prove practically worthless<i>As published on <a href="http://www.j-source.ca/article/postmedia%E2%80%99s-promises-prove-practically-worthless" target="_blank">J-Source.ca</a> and reprinted by <a href="http://blog.wan-ifra.org/2016/02/10/postmedia-s-promises-prove-practically-worthless" target="_blank">World News Publishing Focus</a> and <a href="http://www.daniellemagazine.ca/the-great-canadian-newspaper-roll-up-has-begun/" target="_blank">Danielle</a> magazine.</i><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
And so the Great Canadian
Newspaper Roll-up has begun.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
This was predictable once the
Competition Bureau rubber-stamped Postmedia Network’s $316-million takeover of
Sun Media last year. As a result, Postmedia now publishes 37.4 per cent of
Canadian daily newspaper circulation, according to my calculations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
It is in the three westernmost
provinces, however, where its grip is truly unprecedented. In B.C., <st1:state>Alberta</st1:state>
and <st1:state>Saskatchewan</st1:state>, it now owns
eight of the nine largest dailies and accounts for a whopping 75.4 per cent of
daily newspaper circulation. It owns both daily newspapers in <st1:city>Calgary</st1:city>,
<st1:city>Edmonton</st1:city> and <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>,
as it already did in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
In all four cities, newsrooms
will be merged. Residents of these burghs should be outraged, as should all
Canadians who cherish what little remains of journalistic independence in this
country. Not to mention those who put any value on promises made.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
The immediate angle that
emanated from certain journalistic quarters in response to this news was a
hand-wringing wail that it was only more evidence that <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2016/01/20/Postmedia-Cuts/">newspapers are
dying</a>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
Nothing could be further from
the truth, as I explain in my recent book, Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth
of the Death of Newspapers. A quick glance at Postmedia’s latest <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Postmedia-Network-Canada-Corp-FS-Q1-F16-Final.pdf">financial
statement</a> shows it recorded operating income of $42.5 million on
revenues of $251 million in the first quarter of its 2015-16 fiscal year, for a
very healthy profit margin of 16.9 per cent.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
The self-serving myth that
newspapers are dying is one that publishers have promoted to advantage for
decades. It was used with great success in the <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
after the Supreme Court ruled illegal in 1965 the increasingly popular “joint
operating agreements” between newspapers that went into business together, set
advertising and subscription rates jointly and split the profits.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
Newspapers lobbied furiously
for an exemption from <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
antitrust laws after the Supreme Court ruling, claiming that under the
prevailing natural monopoly theory of newspapers there would otherwise be only
one daily eventually left in each city. The result was the Newspaper
Preservation Act of 1970, which sanctified newspaper marriages, but only if
they maintained journalistic competition by keeping separate newsrooms.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
In <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>,
joint operating agreements sprang up on the west coast in the 1950s. The Victoria
Times and The Colonist amalgamated mechanical operations in the
early 1950s, but kept separate newsrooms until the newspapers were merged by
Thomson in 1980. After the <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city> Sun and
the <st1:place><st1:placename>Daily</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>Province</st1:placetype></st1:place> combined
non-editorial operations in 1957, however, the Restrictive Trade Practices
Commission ruled the merger an illegal combination between competitors, as I
document in my 2001 bookPacific Press: The Unauthorized Story of Vancouver’s
Newspaper Monopoly.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
The owners of the Sun and Province,
however, pointed to the closure on both sides of the border of smaller, weaker
newspapers as evidence that newspapers were dying, and they were allowed to go
into business together. The Restrictive Trade Practices Commission made them
promise to keep separate newsrooms forever, which now seems to have been
officially forgotten.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
The events of “Black
Wednesday,” which saw the Ottawa Journal and the Winnipeg
Tribune close on August 27, 1980, prompting a Royal Commission on
Newspapers, was proof positive to many of the natural monopoly theory of newspapers.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
The 1981 Royal Commission
report pointed to the rising tide of ownership concentration, as had a 1970
Senate report on mass media. Both urged measures to stem the inexorable
economic forces that drove industry consolidation, but nothing was ever done.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
The Senate report recommended a
Press Ownership Review Board to oversee changes in ownership, along with
government subsidies to encourage a competing bare-bones “Volkswagen press.”
The Royal Commission urged limits on chain ownership of newspapers, but none
were enacted as the Liberal government of Pierre Trudeau was replaced by the
Progressive Conservatives of Brian Mulroney.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
But then a funny thing happened
in those two cities and others where only one newspaper remained. Colorful
tabloids, modeled after the wildly successful <st1:city>Toronto</st1:city>
Sun, sprang up as competition to monopoly broadsheets in <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>,
<st1:city>Winnipeg</st1:city> and <st1:city>Edmonton</st1:city>. Soon
there was an entire chain of tabloids Suns across <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>.
Even staid old Southam converted its dowdy old <st1:place><st1:placename>Vancouver</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype>Province</st1:placetype></st1:place> to tabloid format in
1983 to stave off extinction, and it thrived with a younger readership, which
in turn attracted advertisers trying to sell to that valued demographic.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
When Postmedia bought the Sun
Media chain in late 2014, CEO Paul Godfrey <a href="http://www.torontosun.com/2014/10/06/postmedia-buys-sun-media-for-316m">promised</a> it
would continue to operate independently with its own newsrooms and opinions. He <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/competition-bureau-clears-postmedia-deal-for-sun-media-papers/article23610481/">repeated
the promise</a> after the Competition Bureau approved the purchase in
early 2015. By the time the Sun Media takeover was completed a few weeks later,
however, the promise had been softened. Postmedia’s senior vice president of
content, Lou Clancy, <a href="http://business.financialpost.com/news/postmedia-to-integrate-sun-properties-this-year-godfrey">said
then</a> that some writers may be shared between the chains, but that the
“Suns and Postmedia broadsheets would compete with each other.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
I guess it just shows the value
of promises where hedge funds are concerned.<o:p></o:p></div>
<i>Marc Edge is a professor of
media and communication at University Canada West in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>.</i><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-33542038231939414482016-01-28T17:38:00.002-08:002016-02-23T10:26:21.502-08:00Seeking a Villain for Postmedia's Crisis? Try the Competition Bureau<i>As published in <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2016/01/23/Postmedia-Crisis-Competition-Bureau/" target="_blank">The Tyee</a> January 23, 2016</i><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you're looking for a villain in the latest crisis of
Canadian journalism, don't blame Postmedia Network. It's just doing what comes
naturally to a bottom-line corporation that is mostly owned by <a href="http://www.thestar.com/business/2015/01/23/postmedia-and-the-heavy-price-it-pays-to-survive-olive.html">U.S.
hedge funds</a> that are bleeding it (and Canadian journalism) dry with
high-interest loans, which they also largely hold. Postmedia is just trying to
do what it thinks it can get away with to fatten the bottom line and feed its
rapacious owners.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you want to point fingers, look no farther than the
federal <a href="http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/01985.html">Competition
Bureau</a>, the regulatory body that keeps letting them get away with it. The
bureau, according to its <a href="http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/h_00125.html">website</a>,
is ''an independent law enforcement agency'' that is supposed to ensure that
''Canadian businesses and consumers prosper in a competitive and innovative
marketplace.''<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nF1WDyKLZEc/VqrCTbEDGfI/AAAAAAAAAg4/UCzqTw3t0YE/s1600/Mediabaron.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="210" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nF1WDyKLZEc/VqrCTbEDGfI/AAAAAAAAAg4/UCzqTw3t0YE/s320/Mediabaron.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: "lucida grande" , "verdana" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.08px; line-height: 15.12px;">Worried about the future of Canadian media? <br />Understand who's made the decisions.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is knee-deep in complicity when it comes to the sorry
state of <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>'s
news media, in particular for ''<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/postmedia-cuts-ottawa-sun-follow-1.3411579">foolishly</a>''
rubber-stamping Postmedia's $316-million <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2014/10/08/Postmedia-No-More-Monopolies/">purchase</a> of
175 Sun Media newspapers last year without even the need for hearings. This was
effectively the takeover of the country's second-largest newspaper chain by its
largest (seller Quebecor retained three French-language tabloids), yet it was
adjudicated in secret by the Competition Bureau. Not only that, but after it
announced that its economic analysis absurdly <a href="http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/03899.html">concluded</a> that
the two newspapers Postmedia now owns in Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa didn't
compete anyway, the bureau refused my request for a copy of this
taxpayer-funded research.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Once it got the green light for its takeover, Postmedia's <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/postmedia-job-cuts-1.3410497">announcement</a> on
Tuesday that it was merging its newsrooms and eliminating 90 jobs in those
cities was predictable. The shocker is that it would try the same thing in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>.
When the <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city> Sun and
<st1:place><st1:placename>theDaily</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>Province</st1:placetype></st1:place> formed
a partnership in 1957, the Competition Bureau's predecessor, the Restrictive
Trade Practices Commission, held hearings in both <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>
and Vancouver.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As I document in my 2001 <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/pacpress.pdf">book</a> Pacific Press: The
Unauthorized Story of Vancouver's Newspaper Monopoly, the <st1:stockticker>RTP</st1:stockticker>C
declared the merger an illegal combination between competitors. The Sun and Province argued
that if they weren't allowed to go into business together, under the peculiar
economics of the industry there would eventually be only one newspaper left in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>.
That ignored the fact there were then three, but Pacific Press bought the morning Herald from <a href="http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/node/34773">Thomson Newspapers</a> and
quickly folded it. Oh, all right then, responded the <st1:stockticker>RTP</st1:stockticker>C,
go ahead and merge, but make sure you keep separate newsrooms forever and ever.
It was a small price Pacific Press was forced to pay for its lucrative new
monopoly. Well, so much for that.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Competition 'virtually dead'</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Restrictive Trade Practices Commission published its
findings in <a href="https://vpl.bibliocommons.com/item/show/399536038_report_concerning_the_production_and_supply_of_newspapers_in_the_city_of_vancouver_and_elsewhere_in_the_province_of_british_columbia">book
form</a> in 1960. A Special Senate Committee on Mass Media held hearings
and published three thick volumes a decade later. ''There are only five cities
in the country where genuine competition between newspapers exists,'' it <a href="http://www.albertasenator.ca/flashblocks/data/BT%20Media/Davey%20Report%20Vol%201.pdf">noted</a> in
fruitlessly recommending a Press Ownership Review Board to slow consolidation.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A decade after that, when dailies folded in <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>
and <st1:city>Winnipeg</st1:city> on the same day, the
first Prime Minister Trudeau quickly convened a Royal Commission on Newspapers
to investigate. It held hearings across the country and published <a href="http://meetpress.ca/2011/03/01/the-kent-commission-report/">a report</a> that
was accompanied by no fewer than eight book-length research studies.
''Newspaper competition, of the kind that used to be, is virtually dead in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>,''
its report noted. ''This ought not to have been allowed to happen.'' It
recommended limiting newspaper ownership to five dailies per chain, but a
proposed Canada Newspaper Act was never tabled in Parliament as the government
changed from Liberal to Progressive Conservative.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A 2006 Senate report on Canadian news media was sharply
critical of the Competition Bureau, which succeeded the RTPC in the mid-1980s,
for failing to prevent our stratospheric level of press ownership
concentration. It accused the Competition Bureau of nothing short of ''<a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/sen/committee/391/tran/rep/repfinjun06vol1-e.htm#_Toc138058287">neglect</a>''
for failing to halt press consolidation. ''One challenge is the complete
absence of a review mechanism to consider the public interest in news media
mergers,'' it noted. ''The result has been extremely high levels of news media
concentration in particular cities or regions.''<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It recommended a new section for the Competition Act to deal
with news media mergers and prevent corporate dominance in any market. As the
Competition Bureau was unlikely to have the expertise to deal with such
mergers, it recommended an expert panel conduct the review. Election of an
ardently deregulationist Harper government that year, however, doomed the
recommendations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Still profitable, but for whom?</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Postmedia, of course, argues that it now has to compete with
the Internet. Yes, and it now owns Sun Media's canoe.ca news website in
addition to its own Canada.com, giving it two of the country's largest online
news operations. That is in addition to its 37.6 per cent share of paid daily
newspaper circulation in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>,
by my calculations, including 75.4 per cent in the three westernmost provinces,
where it now owns eight of the nine largest dailies.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But newspapers, they will add, are facing tough times. Sure,
but as I document in my 2014 <a href="http://www.straight.com/life/796356/marc-edges-greatly-exaggerated-reveals-why-death-newspapers-overstated">book</a> Greatly
Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death of Newspapers, they are still mostly making
double-digit profit margins. Its latest <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Postmedia-Network-Canada-Corp-FS-Q1-F16-Final.pdf">quarterly
report</a> shows that Postmedia made a healthy 16.9 per cent return on
revenue from September to November, with earnings of $42.5 million on revenues
of $251 million.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But it's funny how things change. The incoming Trudeau
government now has the opportunity to halt the madness. Or it can sit back and
watch as one giant media corporation consolidates almost all of the country's
remaining press competition.</div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-63570702419780161312015-05-05T12:58:00.001-07:002015-05-09T20:28:22.282-07:00My reply to Christopher Waddell<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9A_csCfGjfY/VUmxGqNe0lI/AAAAAAAAAb4/2eE3WH5sIMY/s1600/LRCv23n4g_cover-332x462.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9A_csCfGjfY/VUmxGqNe0lI/AAAAAAAAAb4/2eE3WH5sIMY/s1600/LRCv23n4g_cover-332x462.jpg" width="143" /></a></div>
The <i>Literary Review of Canada</i> has published <a href="http://reviewcanada.ca/magazine/2015/05/paper-pusher/" target="_blank">a review</a> by Carleton University professor <a href="http://carleton.ca/journalism/people/christopher-waddell/" target="_blank">Christopher Waddell</a> of my book that is complimentary but disagrees with my conclusion that
newspapers will survive their current downsizing. “Greatly Exaggerated is a
well-researched and well-explained story of how the newspaper business changed
in the second half of the 20th and into the 21st century,” he writes. “Edge is
correct that newspapers have survived and, despite the predictions of their
imminent demise, have made a profit on their operations.” While agreeing with my findings of fact, however, Waddell comes to the opposite conclusion. Their ability to consistently
generate profits despite plummeting revenues, he writes, does not necessarily ensure the
survival of newspapers.
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
That
hardly guarantees them a long future. Complacently extending Edge’s story into
the near future is a recipe for disillusionment. In fact, what is greatly
exaggerated is just the short time frame for the death of newspapers, not the
end result.</blockquote>
While Waddell’s review, which is the LRC’s cover story for its <a href="http://reviewcanada.ca/magazine/2015/05/" target="_blank">May issue</a>, is
available on its website, the reply its editor Mark Lovewell invited me to
write is not. [Edit: It now is.] That’s why I am posting it on this blog.
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The past, as Christopher Waddell observes, is an imperfect
guide to the future. Understanding what happened in the past and why, however, is
the best guide we have to what will happen in the future, because it aids in
understanding the present and the processes that shaped it and will likely
continue to shape the future. The economics of newspapers, which are incredibly
arcane, must also be understood before their fate can be foreseen. Because of
their unique “dual market” nature, they sell their product to consumers at a
fraction of its cost to produce, which is subsidized by advertisers. With the
enormous post-war bubble in advertising, newspapers came to rely
disproportionately on advertising revenue, which by the recent financial crisis
comprised 87 percent of their total revenues in the <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
and 77 percent in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>.
As newspapers rearrange their business model, readers are finding they now have
to pay higher hard copy prices and increasingly also have to pay for online
access. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Professor Waddell argues that recent job cuts have led to an
emaciated print product for which many do not care to pay more. A vicious
circle caused by cuts, he argues, leads to defections by both readers and
advertisers. This seems a chicken-egg argument, as it was the defection of
readers and advertisers that first prompted cuts. Their demonstrated ability to
downsize, however, is one of the things that will save newspapers. In the lingo
of techies, they are scalable, or easily made larger or smaller. Luckily, as
Professor Waddell notes, newspapers seem to have finally caught on to what it
is that readers want and cannot get elsewhere, which is local news coverage. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
His other argument is that young people don’t read
newspapers and have found other online sources of news, so the supply of
newspaper readers will eventually dry up. Young people have never taken much
interest in the news, however, at least not in the type of news that newspapers
tend to cover. It is only when they grow up, get married, take out mortgages,
and start families that they start to wonder about things like schools, taxes,
politics, and the economy. Newspapers are still by far the largest
newsgathering organizations in their communities. The widespread implementation
of paywalls, which is the other thing that will save newspapers, means that if
people want the news that newspapers provide (and they do), they will have to
pay for it, one way or the other.</blockquote>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-81397140121445527452015-02-03T21:21:00.001-08:002016-02-23T10:28:41.063-08:00From two newspapers to none in Vancouver?<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Reprinted in <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2015/02/05/Newspaper-less-Vancouver-Reply/" target="_blank">The Tyee</a>.</i><br />
<br />
Paul Willcocks takes issue with my prognosis for the
continued survival of newspapers and thinks <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
is on its way from two dailies to none. “What
will life in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city> be like
without a daily local newspaper?” asks Willcocks <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2015/02/03/Vancouver-Without-Newspapers/" target="_blank">in today’s Tyee.</a><b> </b>“It’s an important question, given the gloomy
outlook for Postmedia.” The headline, which Willcocks doubtless did not write,
was even more alarmist: “As Postmedia Withers, Is a Newspaper-less Vancouver
Imminent?”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w3JyLjvDx5c/VNGPYxZmG-I/AAAAAAAAAag/rOycJiMYwoU/s1600/18m7saxsxfh6mjpg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="118" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w3JyLjvDx5c/VNGPYxZmG-I/AAAAAAAAAag/rOycJiMYwoU/s1600/18m7saxsxfh6mjpg.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">An endangered species?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This sort of hysteria was widespread six years ago in the
wake of closures of the long-publishing <i>Rocky Mountain News</i> and,
closer to home, the <i>Seattle Post-Intelligencer</i>. The <i>American
Journalism Review </i>emblazoned “Cities without Newspapers” <a href="http://ajrarchive.org/Article.asp?id=4755" target="_blank">across its cover</a><b>
</b>in mid-2009. The <i>New York
Times</i>, which one study found to be <a href="https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/123352" target="_blank">the worst culprit</a><b> </b>behind the newspapers-are-dying alarmism, quoted one analyst as predicting <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/business/media/12papers.html?pagewanted=all" target="_blank">an imminent extinction</a>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“In 2009 and 2010, all the two-newspaper markets will become
one-newspaper markets, and you will start to see one-newspaper markets become
no-newspaper markets,” said Mike Simonton, a senior director at Fitch Ratings,
who analyzes the industry.</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>USA
Today </i><a href="http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/media/2009-03-17-newspapers-downturn_N.htm" target="_blank">printed a short list</a><b> </b>of cities that were candidates to see their only remaining daily close. “At
least one city — possibly <st1:city>San Francisco</st1:city>,
<st1:city>Miami</st1:city>, <st1:city>Minneapolis</st1:city>
or <st1:city>Cleveland</st1:city> — likely will soon
lose its last daily newspaper, analysts say.” <i>Time </i>magazine even handicapped
the field, running a list of <a href="http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1883785,00.html" target="_blank">The 10 Most Endangered Newspapers in <st1:country-region><st1:place>America</st1:place></st1:country-region></a><b>
</b>on its
website. “It’s possible that eight of the nation’s 50 largest daily newspapers
could cease publication in the next 18 months,” writer Douglas McIntyre
predicted, citing an analysis of financial and market data. Then-<i>Vanity Fair </i>and now-<i>USA Today</i> columnist
Michael Wolff had an even more dire prediction. “About 18 months from now, 80
percent of newspapers will be gone,” he told <a href="https://gigaom.com/2009/04/20/419-newsers-michael-wolff-in-18-months-80-percent-of-newspapers-will-be-gon/" target="_blank">one of the many panels</a><b> </b>convened to debate the future of news.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Eighteen
months later, all and sundry had egg all over their faces as newspapers
stubbornly continued to publish on. The closest thing to the closure of a major
daily was the merger in June 2010 by Victoria-based Black Press (no relation to
Conrad) of the dominant <i>Honolulu Advertiser </i>and its joint publishing partner, the <i>Star-Bulletin</i>,
a struggling tabloid with a circulation of just 37,000. When Advance
Publications reduced its <i>New Orleans Times-Picayune </i>to thrice-weekly
publication in 2012, it was met with a revolt by both readers and advertisers.
After the nearby <i>Baton Rouge Advocate </i>entered the market with a daily <st1:city>New
Orleans</st1:city> edition, Advance started a street tabloid to
be circulated on the days its <i>Times-Picayune </i>didn’t.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So
much for the death of newspapers.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Willcocks, a <strike>retired</strike> former publisher of newspapers in <st1:city>Red
Deer</st1:city>, <st1:city>Saint John</st1:city>,
<st1:city>Peterborough</st1:city> and <st1:state>Victoria</st1:state>
who now resides in <st1:place>Central America</st1:place>, was one of the first
to request a copy of my latest book, <a href="http://www.newstarbooks.com/book.php?book_id=1554201020" target="_blank">Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death of Newspapers,</a>
which was published
in November by <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>’s New Star
Books. He seems to accept its central finding — newspapers are still making money, just not as much as they used to make — but disagrees with my conclusion
that newspapers will thus continue to endure. “I am rooting for the newspapers’
reinvention and survival,” he writes, pointing out Postmedia’s plummeting
revenues. “But with each quarterly report, that seems less likely.” Sure,
Postmedia made $110 million in its last fiscal year, Willcocks admits, but that
was down from $190 million a few years ago. “Who really wants to think about
owning a business on that trajectory?” He is not optimistic about the future of
newspapers. “I’m not hopeful that they will survive in any form,” he writes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
The income they have added from paywalls, he insists, cannot
save newspapers. “Postmedia doesn’t share the information, but the actual
revenue from online subscriptions is likely to provide about $1.2 million per
paper.” Well, that’s $1.2 million more than without paywalls. As the old saying
goes, every little bit helps. Newspapers have shown an entrepreneurial spirit
in diversifying their revenue streams and now pull in almost as much from
events and other income as they do from digital advertising, which stubbornly
refuses to grow. But most of all, it is their ability to downsize effectively
that will save them. As long as they can keep their expenses below the level of
their plummeting revenues, they will remain profitable. Why would anyone close
a profitable business? Newspapers started out as small businesses, typically
published by a one-man gang of writer/editor/publisher, and they are simply on
a trajectory back to that status.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But
Willcocks’ dire prediction, or at least one of the comments on it, has forced
me to revise a long-standing prediction. For the past 30 years, ever since I
was a <i>Province</i> reporter and a member of the Newspaper Guild union executive, I
have pooh-poohed any talk of folding one of the <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
dailies or of merging them. I predicted that if that happened, presumably closure
of the smaller <i>Province</i>, the Sun Media chain would be in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
publishing a tabloid before you could blink. After all, Southam had proved the
tabloid format wildly successful with the <i>Province</i>, and that was what
Sun Media specialized in. But with the announcement in October, just as my book
was going into production, that <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2014/10/08/Postmedia-No-More-Monopolies/" target="_blank">Postmedia had bought the Sun Media chain</a> from
Quebecor, that option is likely off the table. The deal is still subject to
approval by the Competition Bureau, but I expect it to be rubber stamped soon. Quebecor
still publishes a few tabloids, but now they are confined to <st1:state>Quebec</st1:state>.
The country’s other major chain, Torstar, publishes exclusively in <st1:state>Ontario</st1:state>.
“With the Postmedia takeover of Sun papers, either Sun or Province will go for
sure as there’s no longer competition,” pointed out Tyee commenter Dave
Shirlaw. I fear he may be right. After all, as my book chronicles, it has long been shown that one monopoly newspaper can be as profitable, if not more profitable, than two.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-45634061246321317012014-10-12T11:52:00.001-07:002016-02-23T11:03:04.899-08:00Myths muddy media ownership debate<i>Reprinted in The Tyee. </i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Media myths increasingly surround us in today’s ever more mediated world, few of which have proved more persistent than the well-worn canard about newspapers dying.” </blockquote>
That’s the way I start the concluding chapter of my forthcoming book Greatly Exaggerated: The Myth of the Death of Newspapers, which is planned for publication next month by Vancouver’s New Star Books. The book is based on financial research I did for an article in the upcoming issue of the Newspaper Research Journal. It shows that none of the eleven publicly-traded newspaper companies in the U.S. or the five in Canada has shown an annual loss on an operating basis going back to 2006.<i></i><br />
<br />
In fact, most are making double-digit profit margins, or more than twice the historical average of 4.7 percent for a Fortune 500 company. That’s a far cry from the 20-30 percent profit margins newspapers they routinely made before the double whammy of the Great Recession and the Internet reduced their revenues by more than half in the U.S. The decline in revenues in Canada, where the recession was not felt as badly due to more sensible banking regulations, has been about a quarter.<br />
<br />
Just as we entered production this week, a deal went down between Postmedia Network and Quebecor Inc., two of Canada’s biggest media companies. It would give Postmedia the Sun Media chain of mostly tabloids, and with it newspaper monopolies in Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa, as well two dailies in Winnipeg and in the ultra-competitive Toronto market. I am still crunching the numbers on what this would mean for daily newspaper ownership concentration, but it would have to put Postmedia above 30 percent. Canada has had about the highest level of media ownership concentration in the free world, and this tightens it even further.<br />
<br />
The most immediate effect would be to give Postmedia joint operations in four cities – Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto, and Ottawa – including monopolies in three of them. It could combine production, advertising, and circulation operations as it did in Vancouver 57 years ago, while hopefully keeping separate newsrooms. This will be subject to approval by the Competition Bureau, which will examine the extent to which Postmedia will dominate the market for print advertising in Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa.<br />
<br />
The reaction has been predictably outraged among free press advocates. Some, however, have urged that Postmedia be allowed to swallow Sun Media because it is somehow challenged financially. Foremost in this effort has been Ivor Shapiro, chair of the school of journalism at Ryerson University in Toronto.<br />
<br />
“What we’re talking about here is one threatened company . . . buying properties whose future was in doubt,” Shapiro told the Canadian Press when the deal went down last Monday. “That is way better at the end of the day than seeing both of those news organizations close down.” Shapiro repeated his position for the Saturday edition of the Toronto Star.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
What we’re talking about here is two organizations that were on a death watch. I’d rather have one news organization that is not on death’s door, than two news organizations that are. Together they are stronger competitors than they were apart. </blockquote>
No, together they are not competitors. Together they will be able to gouge advertisers and short-change readers in Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa, just like they have done in Vancouver for the past 57 years. These two organizations have hardly been “on death’s door,” as Shapiro puts it. They have been earning enviable profit margins. They just want to make more.<br />
<br />
Here is a truncated version of my compilation of the financial results since 2010 for all five publicly-traded Canadian newspaper companies, which own about three quarters of newspapers north of the border.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3_yzB2N6z_I/VsyrbjG6x6I/AAAAAAAAAhI/9NgtSU82H48/s1600/postmediachart540px.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="160" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3_yzB2N6z_I/VsyrbjG6x6I/AAAAAAAAAhI/9NgtSU82H48/s400/postmediachart540px.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
How could the head of one of Canada’s largest journalism schools be so mistaken about the state of health of the country’s newspaper industry? Well, let’s just say that Professor Shapiro isn’t the only one laboring under the illusion that newspapers are on their last legs. That is the whole thrust of my book, and it’s a complicated tale. Ben Bagdikian called it “the myth of newspaper poverty,” and it has been used to advantage for decades by publishers looking to get around anti-trust laws that were designed to prevent anti-competitive behavior. Newspapers, after all, have considerable power over public perceptions, and they have used it to advantage for decades.<br />
<br />
One of my favorite studies cited in my book examined how large U.S. dailies covered the short spate of newspaper closures during the Great Recession. It found their coverage contained “over-amped drama” and even “tabloidization,” with more than a quarter of all stories containing death imagery. “Newspaper journalists often fail to contextualize their reports with a comprehensive understanding of the economics of their industry,” noted the study. “They rely too heavily on the views of newspaper publishers and too little on empirical data.”<br />
<br />
Toronto Star columnist Rosie DiManno also buys into the misconception that Postmedia is “bleeding money, staggering under accumulated debt and struggling to make its payments.” Even the usually-incisive Donald Gutstein bought into the myth that Postmedia is “hemorrhaging money” in his recent dissection of its ownership by U.S. hedge funds. Gutstein reported that the company lost $154 million in 2013, but that included extraordinary charges against income of $100 million for asset impairment, plus $34 million for restructuring costs, which means they laid off a whole bunch of people and had to pay them severance. Asset impairment is a classic “paper loss” that simply means the estimated value of the business went down. That has to come off the balance sheet of assets and liabilities somehow, and it does so in the annual profit and loss statement. Here is Postmedia’s for 2012 and 2013.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oBbYezjW7QE/Vsyr4OhgVGI/AAAAAAAAAhM/ynCeiyRY78g/s1600/postmedia2-540px.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="306" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oBbYezjW7QE/Vsyr4OhgVGI/AAAAAAAAAhM/ynCeiyRY78g/s400/postmedia2-540px.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Note that interest expense eats up about half of Postmedia’s operating income, but that amount has been going down as the company pays off its debt with its positive cash flow. What I find most interesting, and which I wasn’t able to get into in my book, is that as a result of these financial gyrations it appears Postmedia paid no income tax in either 2012 or 2013. Suggestions for further research?
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-78767287505282456472014-10-08T17:16:00.000-07:002016-02-23T11:04:38.705-08:00The Competition Bureau should not allow Postmedia more local monopolies<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><st1:country-region>An edited version of the following appeared in today</st1:country-region>’s <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2014/10/08/Postmedia-No-More-Monopolies/" target="_blank">Tyee</a>.</i><br />
<st1:country-region><br /></st1:country-region>
<st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>’s
three dominant newspaper chains will be reduced to only two if the federal
Competition Bureau allows Postmedia Network’s proposed <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/2014/10/06/postmedia-to-acquire-sun-medias-english-language-newspapers-and-digital-properties/" target="_blank">$316 million purchase</a> of the Sun Media chain. The deal would create four more joint publishing
operations – in Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, and Toronto – between supposedly
“competing” dailies, similar to Postmedia’s partnership between the <i>Vancouver
Sun</i> and <i>Province</i>. In three of those markets, Postmedia would own
both daily newspapers and would thus dominate the market for print advertising as
it has in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>. (<st1:city>Toronto</st1:city>
has four dailies – the <i>Star</i>, <i>Sun</i>, <i>Globe and Mail</i> and Postmedia’s
<i>National Post</i> – although the latter two are published nationally.) In
addition to <i>Sun</i> tabloids in five cities, including Winnipeg (where it
competes with the<i> Winnipeg</i> <i>Free Press</i>), and the monopoly broadsheet
<i>London Free Press</i>, the purchase would include <i>24 Hours</i> commuter tabloids
in Toronto and Vancouver and <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Fact-Sheet-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">more than 160 community publications</a>, mostly in Ontario, plus Sun Media’s news website <a href="http://en.canoe.ca/home.html" target="_blank">Canoe.ca. </a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“This development further reduces competition in both the
Canadian print and online worlds which are already among the most heavily
concentrated in the world,” noted Vincent Mosco, a Professor Emeritus at Queen’s
University and author of <a href="http://www.sagepub.com/textbooks/Book231852" target="_blank"><i>The Political Economy of Communication</i>.</a> “A primary reason for the takeover
is to entrench Postmedia’s monopoly power. This will slash journalism jobs and
reduce the number of voices providing the variety of views essential for a
thriving democracy.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some academics have argued that concentration of newspaper
ownership <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/10/06/postmedia-quebecor-concentration_n_5942694.html" target="_blank">isn’t a concern</a> in the digital age, because online publications such as The Tyee and even
amateur blogs provide more competition than ever for news and opinion. Not so,
according to Professor Robert Hackett of <st1:place><st1:placename>Simon</st1:placename>
<st1:placename>Fraser</st1:placename> <st1:placename>University</st1:placename></st1:place>,
co-author of <a href="http://www.amazon.ca/The-Missing-News-Filters-Canadas/dp/1551930277" target="_blank"><i>The Missing News</i>.</a><b> </b>“This merger will mean more cutbacks and resource
rationalization, less diversity,” said Hackett. “Unfortunately, volunteer-based
citizen journalism probably won’t fill the growing shortfall in original
general interest newsgathering.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The <a href="http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/01985.html" target="_blank">Competition Bureau</a>is
only allowed to examine the effect of newspaper mergers and takeovers on the market
for advertising, however, not for news and opinion. Its predecessor, the
Combines Investigation Branch of the federal Department of Justice, held
hearings into the 1957 <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/pacpress.pdf" target="_blank">Pacific Press </a>merger between the <i>Vancouver Sun</i> and <i>Province </i>and found it to be
an illegal combination between competitors. The arrangement was allowed to
stand on the basis of “economic necessity,” however, after the parties argued
that under the prevailing Natural Monopoly Theory of Newspapers eventually only
one daily would be left in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>.
(A third daily, the <i>News-Herald</i>, was actually published in <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
until it was bought and folded by the new Pacific Press partnership.) The <i>Vancouver
Sun</i> was then owned by the local Cromie family, while the <i>Province </i>was
owned by the Toronto-based Southam chain. The Cromies sold the <i>Sun </i>to FP
Publications in 1963, which started a succession of Eastern corporate ownership
of <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>’s largest newspaper.
FP was taken over in 1980 by Thomson Newspapers, owner of the <i>Globe and Mail</i>,
which quickly flipped the <i>Sun </i>to Southam, giving it both <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
dailies. That day, <st1:date day="27" month="8" year="1980">August 27, 1980</st1:date>,
became known as “Black Wednesday” because it also saw the closing of Thomson’s <i>Ottawa
Journal</i> and Southam’s <st1:city><st1:place><i>Winnipeg</i></st1:place></st1:city><i>
Tribune. </i>A Royal Commission on Newspapers was called to investigate the
disappearance of newspaper competition in <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>,
while criminal charges of conspiracy and monopoly were laid against the chains,
which were found not guilty after a trial.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tabloids soon replaced the closed dailies in <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>
and <st1:city>Winnipeg</st1:city>, however, modeled
after the <i>Toronto Sun </i>that arose from the ashes of the folded <i>Toronto
Telegram </i>in 1971. <i>Sun </i>tabloids proved so successful across <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>
that Southam converted its <i>Vancouver Province </i>to tabloid format in 1983,
which revived the flagging daily because it attracted a younger readership
prized by advertisers. Southam was <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/SouthamJMM.pdf" target="_blank">taken over in 1996</a><b>
</b>by Conrad Black, who sold it in 2000
to <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/Asper_Nation_3W.pdf" target="_blank">Canwest Global Communications, </a>which renamed Pacific Press the Pacific Newspaper Group. The
Sun Media chain was taken over in 1998 by <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/JMBS.pdf" target="_blank">Quebecor,</a><b> </b>which also publishes the French-language
tabloids <i>Le Journal de Montreal </i>and <i>Le Journal de Quebec.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Competition Bureau held hearings into the acquisition by
Southam in the late 1980s of most of the Lower Mainland’s community newspapers,
including the <i>North Shore News</i>, <i>Vancouver Courier</i> and <i>Now </i>newspapers.
It ordered the sale of some that competed with the Pacific Press dailies for advertising,
but Southam successfully appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court of Canada.
With the 2000 sale of Southam to Canwest, which owned BCTV, <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
came to have possibly the highest level of media ownership concentration in the
free world. This eased considerably with Canwest’s 2009 bankruptcy, after which
its newspapers and Global Television network were sold off separately. Its
newspapers were bought by a consortium of their creditors headed by <a href="http://www.thejournalismdoctor.ca/Blog.php/34" target="_blank">U.S.-basedhedge funds. </a>That put
Postmedia over the foreign ownership limit<b> </b>for newspapers set by the
federal government, which the company <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/postmedia-begins-trading-on-tsx/article585974/" target="_blank">got around</a> by creating two classes of shares that ensured voting control would remain with
Canadian shareholders. Postmedia sold its Lower Mainland community newspapers and
the daily <i>Victoria Times Colonist </i>to Vancouver-based <a href="http://www.glaciermedia.ca/advertisers/regions/british_columbia" target="_blank">Glacier Media</a> in 2011,
further easing newspaper ownership concentration on the West Coast. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Postmedia’s purchase of Sun Media would raise the national
level of newspaper ownership concentration considerably, however. The Canadian
newspaper industry has been dominated recently by Quebecor, Postmedia and
Torstar, publisher of the <i>Toronto Star</i>,<i> </i>the Metro chain of
commuters tabloids in seven Canadian cities, plus three dailies and more than
100 community newspapers in <st1:state>Ontario</st1:state>.
Each controlled <a href="http://www.cmcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Newspapers.xls" target="_blank">about 20 percent of Canadian dailies,</a><b> </b>but adding the Sun Media chain would give Postmedia well over a third of
the industry and create local monopolies in <st1:city>Calgary</st1:city>,
<st1:city>Edmonton</st1:city>, and <st1:city>Ottawa</st1:city>.
Postmedia claims the purchase would provide “cost synergies” of up to $10
million a year, which means that it plans to combine operations where it
publishes more than one daily and to cut jobs and production costs by sharing
office space and printing presses. For that, however, it would need Competition
Bureau approval but could rely on the Pacific Press partnership as a precedent.
It might argue that one of the newspapers in each market would fail unless it
is allowed to go into business with the other and carve up the local market for
print advertising. That would undoubtedly see advertising rates go up, however,
to the detriment of advertisers and consumers. The Competition Bureau should
look askance at that argument, as the success of tabloids has proved that a second
newspaper that appeals to a different demographic can be financially viable.
This has effectively repealed the Natural Monopoly Theory of Newspapers upon
which the Pacific Press monopoly was allowed to stand more than a half century
ago, to the everlasting detriment of Vancouverites. Postmedia executives did
not immediately respond to requests for comment on this story.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-72875191528124576282013-09-18T16:18:00.001-07:002013-09-18T16:20:43.864-07:00U.S. hedge funds behind Postmedia squeezing PNG<div class="MsoNormal">
<em style="background-color: white; color: #666666; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px;">The following was published on</em><span style="background-color: white; color: #666666; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px;"> </span><a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2013/09/18/US-Hedge-Funds-Squeezing-Profitability/" style="background-color: white; color: #b87209; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">The Tyee</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #666666; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px;">.</span><br />
<br />
Faceless foreign ownership is behind newspaper publisher
Postmedia’s push to cut costs at <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>’s
duopoly dailies, according to the head of the union that represents workers at
the Sun and Province. “One of the big problems with Postmedia is it’s
controlled by <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
hedge funds,” said Mike Bocking, president of Unifor Local 2000. The latest
move to trim expenses came with <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/postmedia-will-close-vancouver-printing-plant-union-says/article14209881/" target="_blank">last week’s announcement </a>that Postmedia will sell its Surrey printing plant and either contract out
printing of the dailies or build a more efficient plant that would cost 70-75
percent less to operate. “The essential promise of hedge funds to their investors
is better-than-market returns,” noted Bocking. “Many hedge funds are not really
creators of value, but extractors of value.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hedge funds
that specialize in buying up the debt of distressed companies at pennies on the
dollar jumped into the newspaper business <a href="http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/03/who-owns-newspaper-companies-the-banks-funds-and-investors-and-their-big-slices-of-the-industry/" target="_blank">in a big way</a> during the recent recession. A pair of American hedge funds are now major
owners of the former Southam newspaper chain, which was sold at auction to a
group of its creditors in 2010 following the bankruptcy of Canwest Global
Communications. The new company’s share structure <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/postmedia-begins-trading-on-tsx/article585974/" target="_blank">had to be altered</a> to stay within <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region>’s
foreign ownership limits by giving the <st1:country-region>U.S.</st1:country-region>
hedge funds shares with less voting control. <a href="http://www.thejournalismdoctor.ca/Blog.php/34" target="_blank">Golden Tree Asset Management</a> and <a href="http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/top-stories/139303/how-alden-global-capital-has-become-a-major-player-in-the-media-business/" target="_blank">Alden Global Capital </a>both have directors on the <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/governance-2/governance/" target="_blank">Postmedia board</a>, but Postmedia’s new head man
in Vancouver insists their influence is not what is behind the company’s
downsizing. “I don’t take instructions from Golden Tree or Alden,” said <a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Pacific+Newspaper+Group+announces+change+leadership/7883257/story.html" target="_blank">Gordon Fisher</a>, president of the Postmedia subsidiary Pacific Newspaper Group. “They are
investors. They are in for the long haul.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Instead, Fisher says the
problem at <st1:stockticker>PNG</st1:stockticker> is a cost structure that is
out of line with other Postmedia newspapers, along with declining revenues from
print advertising. “We have to cut our costs where we can,” he said. “I think
our employees understand that reality.” Fisher was sent to <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
in January from Postmedia headquarters near <st1:city>Toronto</st1:city>,
where he was president of the flagship National Post, with an apparent mandate
to cut costs. He should be familiar with the labor situation at the former <a href="http://www.newstarbooks.com/book.php?book_id=0921586884" target="_blank">PacificPress </a>dailies, because
he spent some time at the Sun in the 1970s and ’80s, rising to managing editor.
Fisher shocked <st1:stockticker>PNG</st1:stockticker> workers shortly after his
return to <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city> with what the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/04/24/vancouver-sun-province-cuts_n_3150173.html" target="_blank">HuffingtonPost</a> described as “one of the bluntest newsroom memos ever seen.” Fisher told <st1:stockticker>PNG</st1:stockticker>
staff that “if we don't find ways to dramatically reduce costs, the answer is
clear. The business is unsustainable.” The alarming memo was quickly leaked and
<a href="http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/137810233-Vancouver-memo_1.pdf" target="_blank">posted online</a>. “We are all fighting not only for the future of the <st1:city>Vancouver</st1:city>
Sun and the Province but for the lives and well-being of our families,” it
concluded. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
The first result of the
cost-cutting program was the <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/updated-layoffs-coming-vancouver-sun-and-province" target="_blank">departure </a>of about 110 employees through buyouts and early retirement. In June, <st1:stockticker>PNG</st1:stockticker>
put two entire floors of the <st1:street>Granville Square</st1:street>
office tower it leases <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/updated-postmedia-vacates-two-floors-vancouver-newsroom-space" target="_blank">up for sublet</a> at below market rates. Then in July, the company announced <a href="http://commonsensecanadian.ca/why-rafe-mair-is-cancelling-his-sun-province-subscriptions/" target="_blank">stiff hikes</a> in subscription rates. Fisher cited “significant declines in advertising
revenues” in a full-page letter to readers explaining the increase, yet
promised them“we will be investing in and improving all our news platforms.”
That appeared at odds with the wholesale departures, including high-profile
columnists like <a href="http://www.mining.com/david-baines-parts-ways-with-the-vancouver-sun-28810/" target="_blank">David Baines</a> and <a href="http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/jonathanmanthorpe.html" target="_blank">Jonathan Manthorpe</a>, but
Fisher said that only about 15 of the severed staff came from Sun and Province
newsrooms. “We didn’t lose a lot of producing, creative, hard-nosed reporters.
We had a couple of high-profile columnists who decided to retire. We’ve always
had really good people come and then decide it was time to retire. There was
nothing we could have done about that anyways.” A paywall erected around Sun
and Province online content that was announced at the same time has been a huge
success so far, according to Fisher. “We are exceeding our targets
significantly,” he said.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.thejournalismdoctor.ca/Blog.php/drowning-the-kittens" target="_blank">John Miller</a>, the author of Yesterday's New: Why Canada's Daily Newspapers are Failing Us, Fisher
“has a reputation as a corporate hatchet man, having presided over many
staff-reduction programs starting with the mass firing he carried out as new
publisher of the Kingston Whig-Standard in 1994.” Fisher defended those cuts as
necessary, as were subsequent staff reductions he made at the National Post and
the recent downsizing at <st1:stockticker>PNG</st1:stockticker>. “The
restructuring we have done has taken out of the newsrooms production work,” he
said. “It’s not work that journalists do. There’s a digital evolution under
way, and we’d be crazy to ignore it.” He insisted that both the Sun and
Province will continue to publish in print and added there are no plans to
close one newspaper or to merge them into one publication. “I didn’t come here
to do that,” he said.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While hard
times have definitely visited the newspaper business with the advent of the
Internet and the recent recession, there’s only one small problem with Postmedia
pleading poverty. It is actually making very healthy profits. Its latest
quarterly report shows that it made $32.8 million in its third quarter on
$191.8 million in revenues, for a tidy profit margin of 17 percent. It’s right
there <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Postmedia-Network-Canada-Corp-FS-Q3-F13.pdf" target="_blank">on page 2</a>. That’s an enviable rate of return, given that the average profit margin of a
Fortune 500 company is <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/13/news/companies/fortune_500_profits.fortune/" target="_blank">4.7 percent</a>. But it’s not quite as good as Postmedia did <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2012_Annual_Report_FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">last year</a>, when its return on revenue was 17.3 percent, and not nearly as good as <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Final-PDF-of-Annual-Report-for-posting.pdf" target="_blank">in 2011</a>, when it raked in profits at a rate of 19.7 percent. Postmedia reported that it
suffered an operating loss of $95 million last quarter, but that figure is only
arrived at by subtracting from its earnings some extraordinary and even
imaginary expenses. Restructuring costs of $16.8 million included severance
packages incurred in jettisoning staff, which will save the company money in
the long term. Most of Postmedia’s
supposed operating loss, however, comes from a $93.9 million “impairment”
charge that resulted from a reduced valuation of the company’s worth. Far from
bleeding red ink, the company turns out to be well into the black, just <a href="http://dwmw.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/newspaper-killers-and-the-death-of-journalism-postmedias-attempts-to-slash-and-burn-its-way-to-excess-profits/" target="_blank">not farenough for some</a>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That could
prove problematic in convincing Sun and Province press operators to make the
kinds of concessions <st1:stockticker>PNG</st1:stockticker> is apparently looking
for. The company has given <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/09/02/birth-of-canadas-largest-private-sector-union-sparks-optimism-for-beleaguered-labour-movement/" target="_blank">Unifor</a>, the new union created by the recent merger of the Communication, Energy and
Paperworkers Union and the Canadian Auto Workers, until November 18 to come up
with agreement that would see construction of a new, more efficient printing
plant that <a href="http://www.mediaunion.ca/archives/2013/09/postmedia-to-close-kennedy-heights-plant/#" target="_blank">reduces costs by up to three quarters</a>. The company has already entered into a contract with an outside company to
print the Sun and Province starting in early 2015, but it will not go into
effect if the company and union <a href="http://www.postmedia.com/2013/09/09/postmedia-network-to-sell-two-real-estate-properties/" target="_blank">reach a deal</a>.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Press
operators once had one of the most militant of the unions at the dailies, which
were shut down by strikes and lockouts seven times between 1967 and 1994.
Restrictive <a href="http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2013/04/24/unions-killed-the-media-star/" target="_blank">manning clauses</a> often required staffing levels on the presses that were well above what were
required by advances in printing technology. The multitude of powerful unions
at the Sun and Province were consolidated into one as the result of a company initiative
in 1996. Work stoppages have been infrequent ever since, perhaps because a
large, diverse union tends to be less militant than a small one with greater
solidarity. It looks like Unifor might get its first big test fighting for the
jobs of its 260 press operators at <st1:stockticker>PNG</st1:stockticker>. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3624785028318420192.post-2316758900078192832013-03-30T13:09:00.001-07:002013-03-30T13:09:36.708-07:00Paywalls paying off<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 5pt 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<em>The following was published on</em> <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2013/03/30/Paywalls-Work/" target="_blank">The Tyee</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 5pt 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 5pt 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none;">
Shannon Rupp and I are usually of a mind on most things media, which is why I was surprised by her latest offering, “<a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2013/03/20/Paywall-Woes/" target="_blank">Paywall Woes</a>.”<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>By most reports, the paywall introduced by the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">New York Times</i> two years ago has been a <a href="http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/the_nyt_grows_in_2012.php?page=all" target="_blank">huge success</a> and has <a href="http://www.niemanlab.org/2013/03/the-newsonomics-of-why-paywalls-now/" target="_blank">provided hope</a> for many newspapers that have been flailing about for years in search of an online strategy. Whether that hope is justified or not is another matter. Just because readers will buck up to read the digital edition of the esteemed <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Times</i> doesn’t necessarily mean they will part with hard-earned coin to read just any old rag online. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
But according to the just-released <a href="http://stateofthemedia.org/2013/newspapers-stabilizing-but-still-threatened/" target="_blank">State of the News Media</a> report,<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>which is published annually by the <st1:place><st1:placename>Pew</st1:placename> <st1:placename>Research</st1:placename> <st1:placetype>Center</st1:placetype></st1:place>, digital pay plans for online<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>access have “caught fire” in the past year. The largest <st1:country-region><st1:place>U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> newspaper chain, Gannett, followed the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Times’</i> lead and erected paywalls at almost all of its dailies in 2012. Together with print price increases, noted the report, Gannett recently told investors it expected the changes to generate $100 million in additional earnings annually starting this year.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
When Gannett reported in early 2013 that its digital revenue projections were on track, it seemed to signal that such initiatives could work at papers of varying sizes, not just The New York Times. Other chains also have embraced digital pay: Lee’s 47 papers, beginning in the second half of 2011; McClatchy’s 30 in 2012, and E.W. Scripps’ 14 early this year.</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
In <st1:country-region><st1:place>Canada</st1:place></st1:country-region>, paywalls are also going up at dailies across the country. The <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Globe and Mail</i> started charging for its digital content in October and has <a href="http://www.marketingmag.ca/news/media-news/assessing-the-globes-paywall-numbers-72471" target="_blank">80,000 subscribers</a> already, although many may be on discounted trials or enjoy free access as print subscribers. Sun Media and Postmedia newspapers have been disappearing behind paywalls for more than a year, and the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Toronto Star</i> <a href="http://www.netnewscheck.com/article/25103/toronto-readers-embrace-papers-paywalls" target="_blank">plans one</a> for this fall.<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
Print price increases are the other strategy newspapers are relying on to help make up the deficit they are suffering in advertising revenues, which in the <st1:country-region><st1:place>U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> have fallen by more than half since 2007. (The decrease has only been about 25 percent in <st1:country-region><st1:place>Canada</st1:place></st1:country-region> due to our healthier economy.) Advertisers contributed much more to newspaper revenues in <st1:place>North America</st1:place> than in other countries until recently. At one count a few years ago, it was a whopping 87 percent in the <st1:country-region><st1:place>U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region>, while <st1:country-region><st1:place>Canada</st1:place></st1:country-region> was next at 77 percent. In <st1:place>Europe</st1:place>, the split is closer to 50/50. In <st1:country-region><st1:place>Japan</st1:place></st1:country-region>, advertising accounts for only about 35 percent of newspaper revenues.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Media economists have long noted the “inelasticity” of demand for newspapers, which means that readers will pay more for them. Publishers here wanted to keep their circulation numbers up as high as possible to inflate advertising rates, however, so they kept cover prices artificially low. Now that ads are dwindling, readers are finding they have to pay closer to their fair share. I was gobsmacked last Friday when I had to fork out $1.75 for a copy of the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Vancouver Sun</i>.</div>
<br />
So the question becomes how <st1:place>Shannon</st1:place> could have got it so wrong, and therein lies a tale. Being as media savvy as she is, you would think that she would be more skeptical of online information.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But she saw the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Forbes</i> <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2013/03/02/print-medias-digital-malpractice/" target="_blank">logo</a> – “business advice for the rich and richer,” as she put it – and figured it had to be reliable. Instead it turns out that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Forbes</i> is a tad promiscuous online. More than a tad, actually. Not only does it <a href="http://www.emediavitals.com/content/forbes-gives-advertisers-editorial-voice" target="_blank">allow advertisers</a> into its bed, it’ll have <a href="http://blogs.forbes.com/help/how-do-i-become-a-contributor/" target="_blank">almost anybody</a>. Greg Satell may be a “contributor” to the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Forbes</i> website, but he’s never written a word for the magazine, from what I can tell. He is instead part of the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Forbes</i> legion of bloggers . . . er, contributors who post their online ramblings on the magazine’s website. He is a media consultant who calls his own blog <a href="http://www.digitaltonto.com/about/" target="_blank">Digital Tonto</a> after the Lone Ranger joke that ends: “What do you mean ‘we,’ white man?” Satell commits numerous crimes against logic in railing against “<a href="http://www.digitaltonto.com/2013/print-medias-digital-malpractice/" target="_blank">Print Media’s Digital Malpractice</a>,” on his blog,<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>and before you know it he’s “reporting” for <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Forbes</i>. He starts by conflating newspapers and magazines, which operate in quite different markets, then he lapses into the kind of media consultantspeak we heard at the height of misguided enthusiasm for convergence a dozen years ago.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The strength of a business isn’t determined by how you hit internal targets, but how you compete in the marketplace. While print publishers have chosen to focus on signing up subscribers, digital media is booming, creating transformative business models and new media lifestyles. Incumbent media businesses, as a whole, are falling behind. To survive, they will need to shift paradigms.</blockquote>
There’s only one small problem with his analysis. There seems to still be plenty of money in signing up subscribers, while there is little to none in digital . . . er, booming. There’s even still lots of money in newspaper advertising, <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2012/09/13/Old-Media-Not-Dying/" target="_blank">as I keep trying to tell people</a>. There was almost<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>$20 billion in the <st1:country-region><st1:place>U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> last year, and more than $2 billion in <st1:country-region><st1:place>Canada</st1:place></st1:country-region>. That’s hardly <a href="http://www.marcedge.com/Notdeadyet.pdf" target="_blank">chump change</a>, which is exactly what you can charge for online advertising nowadays. Newspaper revenues from online advertising have flat-lined over the past few years as rates have fallen through the floor. Publishers now talk of print dollars versus “digital dimes.” It is slowly dawning on people that the business model for online media (infinite supply) isn’t quite as lucrative as it is for newspapers (monopoly). Under the first law of economics – supply and demand – prices keep going down in the first case, but they stay strong in the second. The “subscription trap” that Satell warns publishers they are walking into is instead their overdue realization that, if there’s no money in online advertising, they might as well start charging readers for online access. His “golden rule” – marketers will pay more for consumers than consumers will pay for content – has long since been repealed by the fact that marketers can find scads of eyeballs online for a pittance. Advertisers who want to reach an engaged and contemplative audience that is wealthy enough (and wise enough) to pay for a newspaper subscription online, however, will have access to a prized demographic. But Satell keeps singing the same song that media consultants have been chanting since the 1970s, when they kept saying newspapers had to become more like their new media competition – television. <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Instead of fretting about lost distribution revenues that were never really there, publishers should attack the TV market. Online video is a promising business that is growing like wildfire and fits nicely with existing print brands (magazines especially).<o:p> </o:p></blockquote>
Media consultants always urge, in essence, that newspapers should try to become more like the new medium that is disrupting their industry instead of playing to their own strengths and allowing the new medium to discover its limitations the hard way. In the 1970s and ’80s that gave us fluffy “disco” journalism and <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">USA Today</i>. Now it’s all about Tweeting and Facebooking at the speed of light and giving it away for free online. By the end of Satell’s screed, the old newspaper person in me wants to scream loudly enough to drown out the sound of fingernails on chalk board that is his digital zeal.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
At the root of the problem is that many publishers seem confused about what business they’re in. After all, the function of media is not to build a subscriber base, but to spread ideas. In that sense, there is no digital threat, only enormous opportunity.<o:p></o:p></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
Some ideas, it turns out, are worth more than others. Which brings us to the problem of how we got here in the first place. How did Greg Satell, media consultant, get a platform on Forbes.com to spread his ill-conceived ramblings about media business models? In their haste to open their bottomless webpages to unpaid content from “citizen” journalists, media consultants, and even advertisers, publishers like <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Forbes</i> have sullied their brands by lending their names to content that would never pass muster with their editors. After all, editors prefer to check facts before they publish them, not to mention correct annoying grammatical errors such as Satell continually commits. This is the downside of the online revolution, where even <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/conrad-black/" target="_blank">Conrad Black</a> can be a columnist for the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Huffington Post</i>. As long as he’s prepared to do so for free, of course. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
There is an old saying to the effect that you get what you pay for. It seems to apply here.</div>
Marc Edgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00510625002771364258noreply@blogger.com0