Newspaper circulation losses accelerate -- except at The Wall Street Journal
It was a good six months to be The Wall Street Journal. It was a bad six months to be just about anyone else. On Monday, the Audit Bureau of Circulations released its official figures for the half-year ending Sept. 30, and the picture they paint is no less grim for being thoroughly foreseeable. Average daily circulation for the 379 papers reporting to ABC was down 10.6 percent, a marked acceleration of the downward trend from recent reports. The story at 562 Sunday papers was only slightly better: a 7.5 percent decline.
The Wall Street Journal was the only one of the 25 largest dailies to show an increase in circulation; its average rose 0.6 percent to 2.02 million, partly on the strength of strong sales of its electronic edition, which count towards overall circulation. As expected, the Journal overtook USA Today as the largest daily newspaper, with the Gannett-owned paper's circulation tumbling 17.1 percent to 1.9 million, owing largely to a recession-related downturn in hotel stays. (USA Today derives a high proportion of its sales from copies offered to hotel guests.)
Among other major dailies, The New York Times and The Washington Post both fared relatively well, posting declines of 7.3 and 6.4 percent, respectively. The New York Daily News and New York Post both suffered double-digit drops -- 14 percent for the News, and 18.8 percent for the Post. And the ailing San Francisco Chronicle took the biggest hit of the top 25 papers, nose-diving 25.8 percent to 251,782 copies.
Here's another indication of how rough things are. The ABC always compiles a list of the top-10 leading circulation gainers. Of the 10, four made the list by notching gains of less than 1 percent.
D-Day for Harry Reid: Can he wrangle 60 votes for Senate health bill?
Fed stalls on Chinese bank deal, costs taxpayers $1.7 billion
Dell in a handbasket: Should founder Michael Dell resign?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-26-2009 @ 12:10PM
nick said...
Would love to see New York Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post, LA Times to out of business, all these papers have become the slime organ of the OBAMA Express. Good bye and sleep tight!!!
Reply
10-26-2009 @ 2:12PM
Dr. E. Mark Stern said...
I never quite thought that it would be a Murdoch paper to be the fittest survivor. But frankly, the Wall Street Journal is the most read-worthy of all the newspapers. It's formula is hardly unchanged - just the best journalism for the buck - if you are willing to thumb past the odd and oddly formulated editorials.
Reply
10-30-2009 @ 11:14AM
cytx4038 said...
Some of the reason for the decline is likely the internet, but there is a much bigger reason. Most newspapers have abandoned their primary responsibility to protect the truth and instead have become biased mouth pieces for various causes, Obama, Al Gore, environmental groups, labor unions, etc. As a result they apply no thinking to what they report and it shows.
The American public realizes this and have droves turned to more unbiased sources for information.
Newspapers need to relearn the fundamental guidelines of good journalism........accuracy and objectivity.
Reply
10-26-2009 @ 1:43PM
GeraldR5 said...
When newspapers began to become a house organ for the liberal left, they began to die. Reporters today seem more interested in propagandizing that reporting the news. No wonder their circulation, like their credibility, is dwindling!
Reply
10-26-2009 @ 2:00PM
Me said...
The WSJ is doing well for the same reason The Economist is doing well: they both have substance and are not slanted in either way.
Everything else is just regurtated AP or Reuters nonsense.
Reply
10-26-2009 @ 3:22PM
Tom Travis said...
Yellow dog journalism will not attract readers. News should be reported as factual data, not the opinion of the editors/reporters.
It is so obvious that the difference between Bush and Obama that the press is not objective that most of us look for local news in the paper and eschew the national view.
Reply
11-03-2009 @ 4:56PM
The Mask CTF said...
My family had a newspaper delivered daily since I was 6 years old (I'm 56 now). That daily newspaper presence grew to 3 daily newspapers by 1981. Today they're back to 1 and are ready to drop that. Why? They are simply tired of reading something inaccurately called "news" which is more accurately described as "whatever the editorial board decides to call 'facts' in order to push their agenda". They are 80 years old and you cannot understand what a big move this is for them to eliminate such a long-standing tradition due to their disgust. They are almost as mad at the TV "journalists" at CBS, ABC and particularly MSNBC who, as my dad says, "don't know the truth from a hole in the ground". My kudos to the WSJ staff for making the ONLY major newspaper that showed positive growth so far this year as conservative, free-market, capitalistic publication. I've decided to help keep the WSJ going in the right direction by spending my money with them as a new subscriber.
Reply
11-07-2009 @ 3:52AM
shawn matthews said...
Newspaper are good but partly true source of current news.
And now a days newspaper industry is going downstairs-as per Mr. Warren Buffet(the billionare).
==================
Shawn matthews
foreclosed home auctions
Reply