New York Times: Revenue dropped 10.1% for July, as ad revenues fell by over 15%. Its sister, The Boston Globe, fared even worse - ads dropped nearly 25%.
Newspapers across the country have seen revenue decline as advertisers shift spending online and circulation slips.
"Slips"? It's a bit more than that. Subscribers are leaving in droves ("circulation" is generally defined as one subscriber x 4 or 5, as newspapers love to think that every subscriber lets others read his or her copy). Newspapers have yet to figure out why this phenomenon is occurring, but that's because they choose to ignore the one common factor: they don't report. Instead, they publish opinion pieces. Most "journalists" today are leftist Democrats, and so they publish pieces that are slanted toward their perspective.
As famed Oregonian "journalist" Jonathan Nicholas opined, he got into the business because he "wanted to make a difference".
And that's SOP for so-called "journalists" today: they aren't there to report the facts, they want to "make a difference". In fact, they're so busy "making a difference" that increasing numbers of folks just don't bother with them any longer.
Update: Oregonguy informs me that my understanding of "circulation" vs. "readership" is flawed; noting that is typically "readership" numbers that are inflated. "Circulation", he maintains, refer to paid subscriptions, though they may include comped deliveries to hotels and other locations. We seem to be slightly at odds on this, as my understanding is that in recent years, "circulation" has been re-defined. However, you should take note of OG's point, and reinterpret this post accordingly.
My apologies for any confusion.
