NYT's Price Hike Can't Hide The Real Problem: The Paper Lacks A Core Mission
This story was written by Lauren Rich Fine.
Lauren Rich Fine is ContentNext's director of research. Previously, she was a managing director at Merrill Lynch in equity research, where she covered the publishing, information, advertising and online industries. She is also a professor at Kent State University.
Dear New York Times,
Thank you for the letter describing your plans to raise home-delivery circulation rates for my region (Ohio) beginning June 1. You plan to charge me $7.40 for the shrinking Sunday edition and $14.80 for a weekly subscriptionthat comes to about $770 a year. You are pushing me to my limit and, as a result, I have had quite a few conversations with myself.
I like to think of myself as a New York Times (NYSE: NYT) reader. In fact, most days I do read The New York Times. However, it isn't my first or second read of the morning. It is a bit intimidating and I don't mean intellectually. There is almost too much to consume and it isn't particularly user friendly. Your attempt to mimic The Wall Street Journal with headlines and synopses has only been successful in that it allows me to thumb through those pages without even glancing; it isn't easy to browse. After reading my local paper, which is a breeze and a pleasure, I read The Wall Street Journal front to back. The information is presented well and it is focused.
I remember the days when the Times started adding new sections and magazines to prove to the rest of the industry that consumers would pay for quality. The problem is that while I appreciate the quality, I wasn't looking for more. In order to consume all that you produce, I would have to forgo something else in the day, and you have yet to make that possible; you can't (and shouldn't) recreate my local news coverage and your business section, while sometimes interesting, doesn't come close to matching what the Journal provides. I look for what I can't get elsewhere. What does The New York Times stand for? Is it about investigative journalism? International news coverage? Arts? Science? Business?
At a time when most papers are trying to determine what is unique or distinct about their coverage for their audience, The New York Times has remained stalwart in its assumption that it has to try to be everything to everyone. I resent this notion as I realize the time you are trying to usurp each day. As the coverage of The New York Times' financial woes continues, I often wonder why you aren't trying to streamline your coverage to what is essential to your core mission, if you even know it.
I want to be supportive of you, and I might even pay the higher circulation ratefor now. Maybe you could offer me some options. This might be a good time to promote the electronic version of your paper. Perhaps you could offer specific sections for a lower rate. What about the Kindle version of the paper? The new Kindle retails for $489 and a monthly subscription to the Times is $13.99; therefore, the first year costs about $657 and then is only $168 a year thereafter. While I might consider a charitable contribution to support investigative journalism, I suspect I am part of a small minority. Further, while I applaud many of your online efforts and admire many of your journalists and columnists, I am circumspect of corporate management and would be really hesitant to hand them a check.
Sincerely,
Lauren Rich Fine
Photo Credit: Flickr/thms.nl
By Lauren Rich Fine