Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 30 2010, 08:26 AM

Please discuss.

Website publication time change

Published: Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:35 PM CDT
Out of respect to our print edition subscribers and their committment to using The News-Dispatch as their local news source, The News -Dispatch website will now be updated at 5 p.m. daily. While we value our online readers, it's only fair that our loyal, paying customers of The News-Dispatch print edition have top priority when it comes to reading the news. For subscription information, call 219-874-7211.

Posted by: Ang Jul 30 2010, 08:41 AM

I understand the "why" part of the change, but there are a lot of people who do not live in MC and it would be pointless for them to have a print copy of the paper sent to them because they live in places like CA, WY, Japan! These people are just as loyal to the N-D as those who pay for a printed copy of the paper. Is it fair to them that they now have to wait all day to catch their home town news simply because they are too far away to pay for a printed paper?

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 30 2010, 08:53 AM

I'd like to see if anyone has any better ideas. I sure do, but I'm not sure what I have to say would matter. If "actual readers" have good ideas, it seems to have more pull.

Posted by: Ang Jul 30 2010, 09:17 AM

Well, the papers are delivered in the morning. People who get a printed paper typically start their day with the N-D. All papers are supposed to be delivered by a certain time that ends with a.m. Correct?

So, instead of 5 pm to update the online version, update it at 1 p.m. By then the print subscribers and people who buy their papers at gas stations and coffee shops will have their copies. Actually, noon is good because I know many times I've gone from place to place wanting to buy a print copy of the paper and if I don't get it before 11, the places are all out of them. I once went to 6 different gas stations, two coin-op machines, and three coffee places looking for a printed paper only to find them sold out every where. Finally, I called a friend who gave me theirs.

IMO, 5 pm is just waaayyyy toooooo late. Noon to 1 pm would be better.

I understand the 5 pm update for the H-A, since that is an afternoon paper, but the N-D is an a.m. paper, so the readers--ALL READERS--should be able to get their news early.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Jul 30 2010, 09:27 AM

This is the same thinking that made Bill Wirtz black out TV for games that didn't sell out games back in the 90's. The world is passing the ND by. It isn't the web that is killing the paper here in town, it is a complete meltdown of both quality and quantity, plus a more expensive price. I can get the Chicago Tribune delivered at 5 am to my house daily for cheaper than I can the City paper. It has about 50 times the material, and it has a full web presence. That web presence has never stopped me from ordering it. All that means is the ND is going to be last and days behind on all stories, just like they are now. The people who run that newspaper are idiots. Their biggest problem has been a complete failure of the higher ups to utilize the web to any extent, like the rest of the world has. There is no twitter, no real on-line advertising, no reporters on the radio, no breaking news on the web, no facebook page, etc. The News Dispatch has completely failed at the 21st century.

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 30 2010, 09:56 AM

As far as quantity and quality in the N-D and H-A, how many reporters and editors does the Chicago Tribune have? I would venture to guess more than a dozen. And to be fair, web revenue is a challenge for any newspaper. Online advertising doesn't make up for the money people used to pay to read the news.

I can't comment on anything else

I suggest if you, as readers, have comments or suggestions on how to change this policy, to please send them to our editor, Chris Schable, at cschable@heraldargus.com.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Jul 30 2010, 10:12 AM

Yeah, the Trib was probably a bad example, but at the same time, I would bet even in smaller markets, the same would hold true.

Maybe I should offer my services to get them a real 21st century presence?

Posted by: Dave Jul 30 2010, 11:57 AM

my comment from the parallel "http://www.citybythelake.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=3264&pid=28340&st=0&#entry28340" thread:

Posted by: southsiderMMX Jul 30 2010, 01:12 PM

2. So their advertisers are worthless on line where they get more views than in the print? That doesn't make sense.

3. You can fix that pretty easily. Look no further than here for an example. Do like everyone else on the planet and make people register, that way they can be tracked and banned if needed in the cases of racism etc.

4. This is completely contradictory. If there are more readers, and they are on-line, and they have paying advertisers on-line, they wouldn't be losing money, because they wouldn't be "giving it away for free". Either they are making money on-line, or they aren't.

Like I said before, the whole rest of the news world seems to be able to manage these things together. The rest of the world has embraced the on-line community and put it to work to their advantage. At the end of the day it is completely obvious that the ND doesn't want to allocate the resources to make the web worth while to them. Instead they are trying to do this on the cheap and to force people to pay the 75 cents for the print edition, when they could make the money back through the web, and the reach of the web.

Posted by: Tom Burns Jul 30 2010, 02:48 PM

There is a major development in management of the local newspapers in preparation at this moment and will soon be on WEFM.

However the management of the moment is only part of a bigger story. Newspapers for years have starved their young. Look at the salaries newspapers pay recent college graduates versus other media or salaries paid to those who go into other fields. They failed to build talent for the future.

Posted by: taxthedeer Jul 30 2010, 04:17 PM

It's after 5PM?...Why hasn't it updated?

Posted by: Ang Jul 30 2010, 09:16 PM

Because 5:00 is quittin' time!

Posted by: Tim Jul 30 2010, 09:52 PM

While I've been vocal in my illumination of the ND's fall from grace in the quality department I'm starting to see the paper as being on life support. I just don't think there are people around to both get the paper out and get the site updated eariler. That's just a guess. But when push comes to shove, as it obviously has, who can really blame them for taking care of the people who pay for the paper before those of us who get it for free? If it's this or nothing, I'll take this.

And hey - the site often goes for days without being updated. So if they actually do update every day @ 5pm I see that as an improvement. Sad - but an improvement.

Posted by: Tim Jul 30 2010, 10:14 PM

I posted this at the site -

So does this mean the webite won't sit for three days w/out being updated like it does now. What does that say about your business model when a cut in service actually yeilds an improvement?

I doubt they'll post it. I've done this before - it never appears.

Just looked at the site. All the headlines are from June 24th. That new policy is really working out!

Morons.

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 31 2010, 01:48 AM

We're getting a lot of comments about the website not being updated the past few days, but that seems to have been fixed. We knew about it all day and were trying to get someone to fix it, as we weren't able to ourselves. I still don't know what happened.

Posted by: Tim Jul 31 2010, 02:33 AM

The ND has an online edition and the ND doesn't know how to fix it?

Really?

Posted by: edgeywood Jul 31 2010, 07:36 AM

The "online community" doesn't have the credibility or the resources for the most part to provide a real news service. This board, as well as aggregators such as Google News depends on material from newspapers such as the N-D for content. Web ads are not as lucrative as print ads, so how do you pay for quality reporters, editors, investigative reporting, etc... ?

I was a subscriber to the Chicago Tribune for over 25 years. In the past few years, they've chosen to pursue a more entertainment (read cheaper to produce) oriented approach. There's less hard news, more "lifestyle" type stories. This drove away many loyal newspaper readers, such as myself. That was their solution to declining readership of the print edition.

I've also noticed a decline in the N-D, but in the interest of supporting local news, I choose to subscribe. I really don't care if someone else reads it for free on the web, but I do know that the web advertising business model is probably unsustainable.

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 31 2010, 10:52 AM

I'm a reporter, not a web technician. We did all we knew to do, and it still wasn't fixed. Give me a break.

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 31 2010, 10:53 AM

Amen, edgeywood. Amen.

Posted by: MC Born & Raised Jul 31 2010, 02:35 PM

The reality is, for most newspapers the Web isn't making any money at all. Even at those publications where a hard-core, concerted effort is made to do so. I believe I've said this in this forum before, but the only way for newspapers to really make money from the Web edition is to charge for it, but the grave mistake in the beginning was giving it away for nothing. Now it's a bit like trying to put toothpaste back in the tube, know what I mean? It's true that many papers are very serious about their Web editions, but I think what you'd find there is they aren't making much money in doing so.

What's interesting to me is how readers who would normally happily pay for a print edition scoff at the idea of paying for the Web edition ...

Posted by: Tim Jul 31 2010, 03:32 PM

I'm sure I didn't say you personally. Nor did I say YOU should fix it. Didn't you write "Discuss" at the beginning of this? And now when someone offers an opinion you either don't like or don't agree with you want them to give you a break.

Please.

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 31 2010, 03:52 PM

I'm just sick of people railing on those of us in the trenches here when the real problem is elsewhere...

Posted by: Tim Jul 31 2010, 03:56 PM

NO ONE IS RAILING ON YOU PERSONALLY. WE ALL KNOW WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES.

Dangling Christ, I clearly said "The ND has an online edition...." Are you the ND?

I've said this before, but despite your childish outbursts - like this one - I'm sure you're one of the people fighting the good fight at the ND.

Lighten the fun up.

Posted by: NDReporter Jul 31 2010, 04:08 PM

Posted by: TSNSPYDER Jul 31 2010, 04:15 PM

He needs to say it this way (in a Scotty voice)..."I'm a reporter, not a web technician, Jim. We did all we knew to do, and it still wasn't fixed. Give me a break."...see, much funnier.
I actually think the web edition is the best it has been. Still not great, but what do you expect for free. I actually enjoy looking at it now.

Do you know what a really neat local online paper is? Check out The Beacher. It's a weekly paper I discovered and has info for NW IN. Not sure how the print edition is (or if there is even one), but I like the online version. Lots of little nice human interest stories in it.

Posted by: Tim Jul 31 2010, 04:27 PM

Just looked at the website - I notice they didn't print my comment but did print one by someone more complimentary.

Weak.

Posted by: Tim Jul 31 2010, 05:03 PM

Which part of that didn't you get? I just read through the thread - not ONE PERSON is "railing" on those of you in the trenches.

You started this discussion. A lot of people here ARE on the side of those of you working hard to plug the hole in the Titanic.

Posted by: Tom Burns Jul 31 2010, 06:39 PM

Now that there is no local publisher, at least at this moment, where does the problem lie?
Corporate? There were some very good reporters at the paper in the past but many seem to have bailed out or been pushed out. That is a loss for the community.

In every market where we operate there have been cuts, but the most severe have been in Michigan City. In one market the publisher has just started charging for content and readers have responded with anger. It looks like there is no easy answer.

As I indicated some time ago we had an on-line newspaper project underway when the economy softened and we decided to postpone further development. (I know a broadcaster who has launched on-line newspapers successfully). In a normal economy we believe we could support it with advertising. The problem is that bloggers will cut and paste articles from the internet as they now do and that would reduce the value to us and to our clients. I suspect there may be means to protect from reposting, but I am not
certain as we did not look into that aspect.

Posted by: Tim Jul 31 2010, 08:16 PM

I'd think the problem lies in management above people like ND Reporter.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Jul 31 2010, 08:58 PM

Yeah, free advertising sucks, doesn't it?

Posted by: edgeywood Jul 31 2010, 09:32 PM

But how does the newspaper sell advertising? Ever wonder why they practically give away the Chicago Tribune and Post Tribune home subscriptions? Their ad rates are based on circulation. So they reap very little benefit from news aggregators and bloggers. Aggregators may drive some traffic to a paper's web site, but web ad revenues are minuscule compared to the print edition.

Real news organizations are expensive. I believe they are essential for a democracy. How should we fund them? People are willing to fork over $$$ for cable television AND they are subjected to commercials. Is news as important as ESPN, HGTV, HBO?

Posted by: southsiderMMX Jul 31 2010, 09:54 PM

Every single person in this town knows that the News Dispatch has by far the best organization in town. It is all anyone talks about. I talk about it and its reporters all of the time. Heck I would rather them charge for on-line content, or find actually take the time to have subscriber log ins, because it is obvious the organization running the News Dispatch has a date with self-destruction on this course. You can only use your typewriter so long...

Look no further than professional sports as a comparison. I can watch any baseball game on TV. I can listen to it on the radio, I can track it on the internet, and I can talk about it on a message board. Yet year after year two million people go up to US Cellular Field to pay tons of money to see that team in person. You can get that same product in any one of a bunch of different sources. At the end of the day, they are drawing more people than ever in their history, with more ways than ever to get the product for free. Why does it work there?

Posted by: southsiderMMX Jul 31 2010, 10:17 PM

Let me just say this much... This will do nothing to change the News Dispatch's circulation numbers. Maybe I will be 100% wrong, but I think this move will serve to alienate more people from the news, than to bring them back to it locally.

I think the reason philosophically that this move isn't the right one is because it sends the wrong message. In this day and age, the most successful move you can make is to make yourself as active a part of the daily life of people as possible. Today that means being omnipresent. You should be able to track the News Dispatch and react to it anywhere, at anytime. You have to build that connection with people in the 21st century. If you can't be accessed as a seconds notice, you are dead. People want their news at their fingertips, they want to see people's reactions to a story, and they want to be able to leave their two cents, plus they want to be able to argue with the people they don't agree with. Now none of that is possible in Michigan City. Just reading the editors comments from the other day in the HA, they have not even made a real effort to create their own on-line community, instead taking the less effort road. They have no idea if a real on-line presence would work here or not, because they haven't done it. They have no idea if they could make money on-line or not, because they haven't put in the work to get people coming back to their website early and often. All they do it post stories, and that is it. As the kids say, that is a fail.

Posted by: Tim Jul 31 2010, 11:55 PM

^^^

Excellent post, SS.

This statement is pretty much bullsnort -

"While we value our online readers, it's only fair that our loyal, paying customers of The News-Dispatch print edition have top priority when it comes to reading the news."

Why? The ND offers two products/services - one you pay for and one that is free. The News Dispatch offers its readers that option. Since it is the ND's decision to offer the paper for free why should one group of readers have "top priority"?

The ND should have the nads to tell it like it is - we're strangling here so if you want the paper before 5pm you have to buy it.

This is a sissy move.

Posted by: Tom Burns Aug 1 2010, 07:36 AM

"Yeah, free advertising sucks, doesn't it?"

I am not sure I understand this comment and I may not be responding appropriately.

The earlier point is that no news organization can control the distribution of its internet content in that others can repost the content and not the ads which may have appeared on the same internet page. That renders the paid ads of lessor value. I can see the value of posting teasers about news content but not the content unless it can be locked down in such a way that it may not be copied. That is not meant to be a negative comment on bloggers and others, only that any news gatherer has to control the distribution of its product if it expects to cover its costs.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Aug 1 2010, 08:51 AM

I would like to clarify something else here I just thought about, that most people here probably don't know. Citybythelake isn't my only website. As a matter of a fact, it is probably the smallest of all of the ones that I deal with. I started this one at the very end of 2006. I have worked with running similar styles of sites back into the 90's, but really picked up my most valuable stuff in this area starting in 2003. The biggest site I work with has almost 5000 members and a total of over 2,000,000 posts. That site has a membership that runs across five continents.

Judging by the comments here and on the facebook page, I don't think some people realize that I have a lot more perspective than a typical "blogger" as was brought up earlier. Of the dozen or so sites I have worked with over the years, all of them were started from scratch, either by myself, or with a group of about half a dozen different people who have worked together for years on this sort of stuff. Over those years we have all learned about what works, and what doesn't work in this arena. The first objective has almost always been to be completely independent of outside influence. That means here, as it has been with most of the projects, to be 100% advertising free. The very first thing I have found is that when people are willing to send you money, they want a certain amount of influence. They want to see things reported, and not reported, and/or they want them done with a certain spin. At very worse, the need for keeping those advertisers happy makes you do things that might not be in the best long term health of your product, whether it be newspaper, radio, or whatever it is. That is the reason this site has always remained advertising free. There is zero outside influence on the information here, which is exactly the format that has proven the best in my opinion.

Getting past that point, one the large site that I referred to in the first paragraph is an incredible work of pride for me and my buddies. The site is focused on our favorite baseball team. Because of the content and the passion of the fans who follow the site, we have been able to develop relationships with people in the organization that we follow. We have contacts with people all of the way up to Vice Presidents, and all of the way down to people who sell tickets and beer at games. At a certain point in time, we even spun off a site dedicated completely to the minor league teams that make up this organization. We have developed relationships with players as young as out of high school, agents, management, and the PR departments of each minor league team in the system. In both the major and the minor league sites, the growth has been big enough that people contact us for interviews, instead of the other way around like when we started the sites.

The reputation for the sites actually got to be big enough that one of the two major Chicago newspapers approached us last year about folding our web minor league stories and reports into their website. If you read stuff from this newspaper about the major league draft in June, you read information that came from one of my sister websites. The relationship has actually worked really well as it allows us to maintain our creative independence to work our magic, but allows this news organization to use our work in its stories and its websites to keep it from spreading itself thinner than it already does in a day and age when traditional media are suffering. It is a situation where they recognized the power of the web, and instead of trying to insulate their organization from it, they embraced it. They have actually added to the multi-media experiences of their customers. Why? Because they understand that building the relationship between their brand name and the people out there who have embraced 21st century technology and the information age. They take advantage of the work we do for free, and offer their readers something the other print news organization in Chicago doesn't. We get a bigger readership than we could have ever hoped to get. Both of us also hold the rights to dissolve the relationship if it gets to a point where it doesn't work anymore.

I apologize for the long-winded reply here, but I wanted to clarify my perspective after seeing the way that the web is still viewed by some in the traditional media. This site isn't hear to steal traditional media as was inferred a little bit ago. The point of citybythelake has always been to serve as a supplement to information, and as a venue for getting additional information out there.

At the end of the day I believe that the News Dispatch has the best ability in town to gather information, even in its reduced form of today. The reason I have been so passionate on this is that I feel they are making a huge mistake that will do nothing to restore readership. Once you sever the relationship between your line of communication and people, they just go on and live without you. I do not believe that this move is going to do anything to stop the implied loss of circulation at the News Dispatch, because all it will do is show more people in Michigan City that they can get by with out it, instead of building the relationship of dependence on this group. I believe that relationship also goes a really long way towards keeping the reputation as the #1 news source in town. That reputation has also suffered in the eyes of many here as the paper and its staff has gotten smaller and smaller. Some very simple changes would go along way towards restoring that image, in my opinion. I outlined many of them earlier, so I won't bore people with repeating them. But I believe, through my vast experiences in this exact area, that putting the names and faces of a group like the News Dispatch as often as possible, is step one to putting the local paper back on the road to health. With its biggest news resources in town, they should never lag anyone here in having information in front of the general public. The great part of the on-line portion is that you can break a story, without having to have it complete. Adam Parkhouse's twitter should have broke the story that John Boyd was interviewing for other coaching jobs before this site did. The News Dispatch's facebook page should have had a picture of the bald eagle at the beach before this site did. Alicia Ebaugh should have had a breaking news teaser on-line breaking the latest Sanitary District story before the newspaper two counties over did. Instead other sources broke in the info, and anyone on-line knew that the information was out days before it was in the physical newspaper. That does nothing to inspire people to believe that the News Dispatch is the best news source in town, despite the fact that it is. The reporters in this town are suffering because of this. In this case, that means the newspaper itself is suffering.

Posted by: Tom Burns Aug 1 2010, 03:45 PM

Audit Bureau of Circulation figures show the News Dispatch continues to decline in paid circulation to near the tipping point, where daily publication may not be viable.

Posted by: Tom Burns Aug 1 2010, 06:21 PM

Gathering local news is not without considerable hours of labor. At many events locally we have the only reporter present. A few years ago there would be three reporters at most Michigan City events. I think it would be of value for bloggers to thus do more original reporting.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Aug 1 2010, 06:40 PM

Which goes to my point that people should be working together more in this town if the goal is really getting the information out.

The fact that there is little to no cooperation tells me that the goal is really short term profit at the expense of long term viability.

Posted by: Tom Burns Aug 2 2010, 02:15 AM

We have been approached repeatedly by various print publishers to work with them. but their plan amounts to their benefiting from our work and providing little of value. Example: Herald Argus a few years back wanted Michigan City news in exchange for LaPorte news and that ended the day there was a downtown fire in LaPorte early morning but they would not send out anybody until an hour prior to their deadline at 11 a.m. South Bend Tribune wanted us to virtually give them Michigan City news for a few cents a word, a fraction of what it cost us to produce the news. Since we were a half person short we offered to hire another full time person if they would share the cost. That meant providing actual dollars but that was not what they wanted. Nuff said? The publisher of the News Dispatch had some grand plan a couple of years back but then he never followed up on whatever that was, something to do with us jointly developing a series of articles about community improvement.

We get local calls from a print medium asking for details on news they lift off the air. Recently it was who do they see to get that information.

We do share information with both Network Indiana and Shadow/Metro and have in the past with WLS and WBBM.

Posted by: Ang Aug 2 2010, 08:27 AM

There is a way to prevent people from copying and pasting web stories. Snopes.com is set up that way. I don't know how it's done, but you can only repost a link to the page you are viewing, you can't repost the content of the page.

Maybe someone at the N-D should contact Barb Mikkelson (the webmaster for Snopes.com) and ask her how she did that? It would put a little damper on our site as far as reposting news items, but then we can always post the link and summarize the content.

Posted by: mcstumper Aug 2 2010, 04:02 PM

True, but with most things it can be easily circumvented...

http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/3689/how-to-copy-and-select-text-from-snopescom/

Posted by: Agent99 Aug 2 2010, 04:14 PM

There's actually a fairly simple java script that can be used to disable the copy/paste. I use it on parts of my own website. They should ask their website provider about this... though I wonder how much creative control their provider gives them.....
IMHO, more online papers should consider that and/or subscriptions. I'm not sure how a business can continue to exist when they give their products away for free.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Aug 2 2010, 04:25 PM

It is a very common thing if you think about. Like I said earlier, professional sports are the biggest example. You can never set foot into a professional sports arena, and know everything there is to know about your favorite franchise.

Posted by: 5thGen Aug 3 2010, 05:43 AM

I don't post much, however I lurk quite a bit. I live in MC, but do not subscribe to the N-D. Rather I read the Chicago Tribune. I get much more timely info and for significantly less than the N-D. It costs too much to subscribe and I can skim these pages here at CBTL and get the lowdown on what really matters. And get good community feedback (rather than the garbage posted in the comment sections of the two local online editions).

I think a 1 or 2 pm online edition would be smarter. You would still get people looking at it at work, discussing the news of the day before they go home, so more eyes on it. After people are home for the day and busy with their family life, by the time they get back to the online edition it is obsolete. Why bother posting the news online at all.

Posted by: Tom Burns Aug 3 2010, 08:26 AM

While we can and do broadcast news as it develops through the day and often into the night, radio is not a medium of record, a print copy for future use.
That is the value of City by the Lake, in that it is a permanent record and that partially solves the lack of print coverage in the community.

The other problem is that although we cover most local news at the scene, we can't be everywhere. As a result some events are not being covered by any of the traditional media to the extent that it would be if there were a newspaper with more staff.

Posted by: NDReporter Aug 3 2010, 10:52 AM

Information doesn't just appear out of thin air. Someone (like me) needs to be paid to get it to you.

First of all, the Chicago Tribune is a different product than the N-D altogether, as it brings you news from Chicago, the nation and the world. OUR job is to bring you local news along with a mix of nation and world news. You don't and won't get that from the Tribune, or most of the time even from the Post-Tribune or the NWI Times.

For $16.80, you can have the N-D delivered to your home for four weeks. That's 60 cents a day. What other product can you have brought to your home for less? Granted, the Chicago Tribune $5 less for four weeks, which is about 40 cents a day, but their operations are much larger and sophisticated, and they continue to slash prices to try to raise circulation. I feel our price is reasonable for the product we are able to deliver.

If you don't like the "garbage" people post in the comments, why don't you challenge those people or leave your own comments? I would if I were allowed to respond to some of the comments that are left, but I'm not, so I can't. It's up to people like you to fight the tide of ignorance/stupidity that you see. You can't let them dominate the public conversation and depend on CBTL to provide you "good community feedback." CBTL is not the whole community.

I would hate to think that people who really care about this city would simply feel they don't need to support the people who collect the information they discuss by buying the newspaper. The quality of the paper has fallen as circulation revenues have fallen from people who stopped subscribing because they can get the information for free online. Without your support, it's very realistic you may not have a local paper. While the N-D has its flaws, and some of your gripes are valid concerns, there are reporters like me who are trying to bring you useful information. I hope you would support us in that effort.

Posted by: lighter Aug 3 2010, 12:56 PM

While South Bend Trib, nwi.com and now post-trib go 24/7 on the webs, the ND goes backwards. So, when breaking news happens in Michigan City, the ND subscribers are going to go to those other sources to figure out what is going on. And that means you might as well raise the white flag -- you'll be extinct in a few years at this rate. Just become a weekly with a few local stories and a lot more cheap advertising.

A point I've heard ... more people now more than ever are actually READING news. So cater to them, don't avoid them.

The executive editor seemed annoyed that people were sharing passwords/account info... so does that mean one newspaper per person? Does that make sense? Are you going to tell subscribers it'll cost $xx for one person, and five-times that amount for a family of five? No. Of course not. I mean, I guess he could go swipe all the "free" news passed around at McDonalds/Burger King/name your establishment during the morning rush. How is that really any different? At least posting news online gets you a few clicks at your unique internet address.

There are still good people at The News-Dispatch trying to make it work. Unfortuately, there are a few in command who think they're steering a bike in the Tour de France instead of a ship in the ocean. They're changing direction every few hundred feet, annoying some and making others sea sick. My sincere hope is the papers are sold off one day to a company that gets it, the bad managment is cast aside and the paper becomes one of quality again. Not that NDreporter, Parkhouse and several others aren't doing the job ... they just have a few "leaders" who seem to not have a clue in terms of journalism and business sense.

Posted by: Ang Aug 3 2010, 01:10 PM

I support you Alicia! And Adam, too!

Personally, I don't buy the N-D or the H-A because, as time goes by, the paper gets smaller and smaller while the price gets bigger and bigger. I used to, though.

I used to have it delivered to my home for years and years. I read it cover to cover faithfully each and every day, but as time went on, I noticed a decline in quality and quantity. When I moved to WY, I cancelled the subscription (of course), and the first time I came back on vacation, I stopped to buy a paper and noticed how small it seemed to be. Not in thickness, but over all size of the paper itself.

Since I've been back, I've not purchased a print edition of either paper. I just can't justify spending .60 cents on so little paper. I rarely read the online edition either. I get most of my local news from here, and only look at the online paper when SS'der is out and I need to update the board.

Bummer, I know. But Adam and Alicia are excellent journalists and I thoroughly enjoy reading what they write!

Posted by: MC Born & Raised Aug 3 2010, 02:06 PM

I always find the cost complaint to be interesting. Our paper costs 75 cents, granted it used to be 50 cents, but it's 75 cents now. Many people spend up to seven times that on a pack of smokes or even 33 percent more on a Redbox movie or twice that for some gum. 75 cents a day (or 60 cents delivered to your home daily) to be kept abreast of the goings on in the community and world in which you live. I'm a biased observer, of course, but that seems like a good deal to me.

I always find gripes about the post office to be of similar confusion. "44 cents (or whatever it is these days) to mail a letter! Absurd!" But think of what happens for that amount of change, which can usually be found under your couch cushions. Someone takes a letter from you and — if you so desire — will take it thousands of miles away and place it someone else's mailbox. That's one of the best deals of all-time! LOL

Sorry, Ang, that wasn't necessarily directed at you, but the cost is a common complaint I've never fully understood. :-)

Posted by: Ang Aug 3 2010, 02:49 PM

No offense taken. My problem is not really the fact that it's .75 cents to buy a paper off the newstand, or .60 cents delivered to my home. My problem is what I get for that amount of money.

For one, the paper is smaller, and the quantity is less. I've seen that paper be 5 pages in section A and 7 pages in section B--only because Adam took up a bunch of space writing about the Wolves--and no other sections to the paper. The paper is at least 2 inches narrower than the paper used to be and I'm sure that much or more shorter.

I know there is more news in Michigan City and LaPorte County than that. I know that a lot more could be covered and written about. Even if it's "Miss Mable, over on 1000N, her cow won a prize for having the best 'oreo' look to it,"--- there is more local news to talk about than what's being reported in either paper.

I know you journalists are doing the best you can. I know you're working hard to make the paper the best it can be. Alicia I can't really vouch for, but I've seen Adam in action, and I know it's not a matter of just sitting at the keyboard thinking about things to write about.

I think I can pretty much speak for everyone at CBTL (and please correct me if you disagree) that it is not the journalists who are the causing the demise of our paper--it is the so-called "management", and it is not the journalists we criticize (Well, with the exception of DS, who can't tell the difference between a complex sentence and a run-on sentence) when we nag about the paper--it's "management."

Posted by: taxthedeer Aug 3 2010, 03:37 PM

I always felt that Michigan City should consider it a blessing to have not only a local daily newspaper but also two local broadcast radio stations, it's amazing that so many Michigan City based media outlets exist and are able to sustain themselves in such a small demographic.

Growing up in the nearby city of Portage, there was only a local weekly subscription/supermarket newsstand paper called the Portage Journal Press in fact, I think it folded a few years after I moved here in 1993, we also used to receive a local advertising supplement that came free in the mail called "The Scanner" (it was very similar to the former La Porte "Town Crier") .

Portage has never had any local broadcast radio stations either, I always thought that was pretty bad considering that the city of Portage has the third largest population in Northwest Indiana next to Gary and Hammond. They always told me that it's because Portage didn't begin grow until the Toll Road and Expressway were built in the late '50s and finally become incorporated as a city in 1969, by then all the surrounding communities had already been well established.

...and I am Len O'Conner...

Posted by: lighter Aug 4 2010, 09:16 AM

A little research led to this, the herald-argus.com has lost 33 percent of its readers, while the southbendtribune and nwitimes have both gained or held-steady.

The news-dispatch has lost about 25 percent.

http://siteanalytics.compete.com/southbendtribune.com+nwitimes.com+heraldargus.com/

It's neat to look up site v. site. I compared a handful and think what I noticed is the sites updating more often are gaining (chicagobreakingnews, nwitimes, journalgazette, suntimes) and those that have not updated more often are falling behind.

The Indy Star started having "newspaper-paper only" stories that you can't get online -- and their viewers have left. And I doubt they are picking up the paper for one story, they are just feeling snubbed.

Here's some free advise. Either do the internet right, or simply don't do it at all.

Posted by: Tom Burns Aug 5 2010, 08:40 AM

"A little research led to this, the herald-argus.com has lost 33 percent of its readers, while the southbendtribune and nwitimes have both gained or held-steady."

"The news-dispatch has lost about 25 percent."

This closely matches the decline in print edition circulation of each publication: from fall/winter 2005 to fall/winter 2010 according to the figures the publications certified to the Audit Bureau of Circulation:
HA down 34.2%, ND down 26.2%.

Current daily circulation of HA is 7954, ND is 8117. All this data is through the winter season 2009/2010.

Posted by: Tim Aug 5 2010, 11:02 PM

I have to say that the online edition of the ND is far more up to date now than it's been since I've been reading it. Being on the other side of the world the time of the update doesn't bother me.

So kudos to the News Dispatch!

Posted by: southsiderMMX Aug 6 2010, 11:28 AM

And if people wonder about my points on how effective the web campaign of the News Dispatch has been, all you have to do is look at these numbers. I can say on record that my numbers have gone up significantly since 2006, without including anything to do with things like Twitter and Facebook. Paxton has been a complete failure at giving the local writers the tools they need to be effective 21st century journalists, which is why the self-fulling prophecy about the newspaper going downhill is happening. Do the right thing and embrace the web, instead of treating it like Bill Wirtz and television.

Posted by: taxthedeer Aug 7 2010, 12:10 PM

I predict that the demise of the Michigan City News-Dispatch and the La Porte Herald-Argus is imminent, be prepared for a merger between these to publications to be called the "La Porte County News Dispatch":

Posted by: southsiderMMX Aug 7 2010, 04:49 PM

I don't know if I have said it on here, but I have said it on the radio, and on the CBTL facebook page... I believe the merging of the two papers in favor of a county newspaper is just a matter of time. My prediction was that as soon as the ND building gets sold downtown is when it happens. It makes sense to move everyone into the same office at that point, and if you are in the same office, just go ahead and quit the pretenses of news sharing between the two papers, and do what needs to be done to ensure a paper here.

Posted by: Tom Burns Aug 8 2010, 05:59 PM

With the technology of a few years ago that would have been realistic. However it is so easy now to change a masthead and rearrange a few stories in the layout of a page, that there is no eonomy in combining. The Shaw papers in northwest Illinois in similar close markets change the masthead on page one and usually reshuffle the sports page slightly, often only a change in masthead there, too. The other 12 to 22 pages are identical. All comes out of a single building.

Posted by: lighter Aug 27 2010, 12:14 PM

Seems the editors at N-dispatch r eatin a little crow. They r now posting "breaking news." ie, the drowings.

its a good thing to have them do, but isnt it a more evidcene of the exetucives there having lil idea what they're doing?