Newspapers to the TV

The newspaper industry is hurting. Denver's oldest newspaper, the Rocky Mountain News was closed a couple weeks ago. It was approaching its 150th anniversary which is an impressive fact on it's own but when you put it in the context that it was publishing news before there was even a State of Colorado then it becomes mind blowing that it's gone. Denver is officially a one newspaper city which is almost shameful. It's not just Denver's newspapers that are hurting. The Chicago Tribune saw an 8 percent decline in weekly circulation over a 6 month period ending last September and is currently on a hiring freeze along with massive layoffs across all departments. The LA Times is so skinny it looks like one of the free papers you can grab outside your favorite coffee shop or liquor store. The internet changed everything for the paper companies and they should have seen it coming. It was the giant elephant in the room they chose to ignore for most of the '90s. At first most papers wanted to charge for online viewing but people have an aversion to paying for online content. There's some kind of expectation that things posted on the internet should be free. Blogs filled the void and while they aren't a substitute for newspapers they do have a permanent home on the web. The interesting thing is that newspapers have spent millions of dollars and countless hours trying to figure out a business model for the future. The world has turned digital. We are turning into a world of instantaneous gratification and hard papers will become an artifact of the past during my lifetime (and I'm OK with it - I'm ready for some e-paper).

I'm not here to propose a brilliant business model for the newpaper industry. To be honest, I don't think they will ever make the revenue and profits they enjoyed over the last half century. What i do want to think about is whether Cable television will be replaced by the internet or some sort of on demand viewing. HULU is a clear example that they're already thinking about it and if you haven't seen it, GO! it's amazing! A big barrier is the fact that it takes actual video equipment to create a quality television show but the equipment is getting cheaper and cheaper every week. I also think that people will be willing to pay for a TV show if it's good enough but it has to be a nominal amount. I'm not going to shell out 30 bucks for a season of Lost but I might pay 5 bucks. HBO should be used as an example for quality television people are willing to pay for. They continuously have a flagship show that exceeds peoples expectations and keeps you coming back. The Sopranos, The Wire, 6 Feet Under, Sex in the City, Flight of the Concords, Big Love, the wild west show..., Rome and others. This is all i could think of at the moment but it's a very impressive list. If you haven't watched The Wire from start to finish you are missing out.

In summary, I believe television as we know it is going to NEED to change with the times much like the newspapers are realizing. Those that don't will have the same fate as the Denver Post. There are already huge amounts of people that watch everything on their computers and as it becomes easier and the quality improves that number will increase. Soon enough, the internet will be seamlessly integrated into the television you buy at the store and cable companies will need to adopt. Let's hope, as i actually like television, that they figure out how to generate revenue through internet viewership.