How are newspapers still in business?

8 comments

1. They still sell hundreds of thousands of copies

2. Middle aged and old people, they still love ’em and live their lives by every word they say despite is being demonstrably false a lot of the time.

3. That’s a very ageist comment. Why do you assume young people are incapable of reading newspapers.

   Also, there are plenty of newspapers that aren’t anything to do with Murdoch.

4. People do like to read a newspaper. I’ve always liked reading a physical paper but certainly not going to go out and buy a paper showing news from yesterday anymore.

   At least you know what you are getting with a physical paper. You haven’t got to trawl through menus and read articles around multiple advertising windows etc.

5. I worked for a newspaper once.

   I think you’re overthinking newspapers as some sort of conspiracy – when they’re not. (At least not more than other forms of media!) Rupert Murdoch does not have a monopoly on newsprint. There are furthermore plenty of left-leaning papers – such as the Mirror, Guardian, Indy (is that still going?) etc.

   ​

   * Newspapers give you content in what some find to be a pleasing way – you can more easily see and skip stories you don’t like
   * Newspapers can be easier on the eye – they save you looking at a tiny phone screen in your van over lunch. They also give you a break from screens.
   * Newspapers are useful when you’re done for kitchen countertops, cleaning windows, etc
   * For newspaper publishers, print advertising can be profitable – print space generally sells for more than online ads

   ​

   If you’re looking for the whole truth in the mass media, or indeed anywhere, you’re going to be disappointed.

   One big error people make when thinking about the media effects of propaganda is that people read info, absorb it , and then go do it / act that way. In practice, media effects doesn’t work that way.

   Instead, **people largely consume media they are** ***pre-disposed*** **to believe.** That probably includes you and me.

   Here’s a thought experiment:

   The government sets out a new plan to persuade everyone to voluntarily murder their parents. Bombards social media, papers, TV etc with the plan. How many go along with it?

   The answer is: in theory, probably not that many people. And the ones that *do* reach for the dagger would likely be the people who were already **pre-disposed** to killing their parents anyway.

   Lastly, here’s a final human tendency. When you next see someone pickup a red-top paper, you might think something like: *”What an idiot! He’s brainwashed into thinking everything in that paper is true. Thankfully, I myself am more discerning in my own media habits, and can better distinguish the truth.”*

   If you’ve ever thought that, you’re likely experiencing the [third-person effect,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-person_effect) which a common tendency to perceive that mass media messages (like a news story or an advert) have a greater effect **on others** than on themselves.

   Next time you see someone watch, listen or otherwise consume any form of media you don’t agree with, remember this theory. Be wary of it.

6. Its the clickbait shit on their websites and the ad revenue they get from that which keeps them going. There are the odd outliers like the FT and local papers where the print will support them but they’re few and far between.

7. Ads my friend and likely the latter. Would love for Murdoch to experience a huge capital loss. The audacity to request the scrapping of the BBC when he’s had more of a say in elections the last 30 years

8. My in-laws buy a newspaper everyday. Never gets read. Seems more out of habit now