Hello everyone. I'll check back throughout the weekend and would be happy to try to answer any questions or clear anything up that I can.
I think 'Walsh Hall' said it above.... the old model is now antiquated. I am a big fan of the printed product and have multiple newspapers delivered to my place, but online is undeniably a better product. You get news throughout the day, instead of once. You always have it with you (your phone) all the time instead of having to carry around a physical newspaper if you want to access it, you can get videos (highlights) embedded in stories, you can get news alerts, you don't get ink on your hands... people have found it to be better, so more are gravitating that way. There are some parallels to music industry. A lot of us loved records and CDs, but digital music is a better product and music industry needed to adapt (and the music industry learned that allowing people to get it free on Napster wasn't going to work).
The Herald and virtually every other newspaper in the country attempted to give the product away for free online and support it with ads. I don't know of a single newspaper that found this feasible. Companies are going to Facebook, Twitter and Google for targeted ads. They can do that at very good prices. And classifieds, which once used to be a great source of revenue, are not anymore as people are finding places online to post classifieds for free. Newspapers cannot make enough with strictly online ad revenue to support the operation. Everyone has found that giving away our product for free is an unsustainable business model. Perhaps, we were all pretty foolish to think that business model would work in the first place. As a writer, I would love to give away our product for free and allow everyone to read it. However, it is very clear that continuing down that path is not going to work. If we do, we become Blockbuster. There's no doubt about that. The numbers are very plainly telling that to us (and everyone else).
The changing of the business model is not only necessary, but there are some exciting elements to it, IMO. Strictly ad-driven online revenue means your business is based on clicks. It probably encourages the more click-bait type stuff, the viral stuff. A subscriber-based system puts the onus on really good work. People aren't going to subscribe if they're getting click-baited into weak stories or for viral videos. It's up to us journalists to provide content to make the subscription worth it. Even though subscriptions are a pretty good deal (less than 30 cents a day), it is our challenge and responsibility to make sure it's worth it. I know our sports staff is up for that challenge.
A lot of misinformation has been going around, so I figured I would drop by and offer to clear up whatever I can. If you have any questions, let me know. If you have any comments, suggestions, criticisms, let me know. What things do you like and dislike? What do you want to see more of and less of? I'll try to check back this weekend. You can always email me, too, at bschlossman@gfherald.com. Every summer, Tom Miller and I brainstorm and try to come up with ideas on how we can change and innovate our coverage of UND sports. While we have a lot of analytics online that allow us to see what people are reading and how long they're spending on them, it is invaluable to hear straight from readers. Thanks!