When I was in high school, we cut and pasted copy to create our newspaper, poring over lighted glass to hone the edges and fit the pieces together as best we could, kind of like a jigsaw puzzle. Our editors were all there together, talking about the stories, cracking jokes, saying those goofy high school things.
From there, we went out to the printers. Our editor got to do the duty, but once or twice I went as a backup, and it was fascinating to see the paper get laid out and printed off the press.
When we delivered the paper to our fellow students, they had something tangible in their hands, a product we were proud of. That feeling is going away.
Recently, the high school our last two kids are attending decided to phase out the printed version of their newspaper and go to an electronic-only format. This is nothing new if you are in the newspaper, magazine, newsletter or book business. You know that print -- where we turn pages with our fingers and feel paper while we do so rather than slide to the next story electronically -- is going out of business.
Companies and associations that put out newsletters grapple regularly with the “cost vs. convenience” issue. It costs less to send it electronically, but many people find the convenience of carrying around a newsletter or newspaper more conducive to reading it at their discretion.
This conflict has been around for multiple years and is still not fully resolved. When you have remote workers, they cannot read online. There are still, believe it or not, people who don’t have computers (laptop or desktop) at home. They may have a smartphone, but the reading screen is so small it detracts from the stories.
As a newspaper and magazine kinda guy, I love turning the pages and burying my face in a good story. It’s pleasant. So when I hear of high schools eliminating their school paper in hard copy and putting it online, it’s bothersome.
Interestingly, our younger daughter Skyler (Read: Next Generation) is against the electronic version, too. Maybe collectively we’ll be able to argue for the retention of paper copies.
Here’s her two cents: When the school used to publish the paper in hard copies, the students knew when it came out. It was placed at their disposal at multiple locations, they’d grab a copy and read it when they had down time. It was a product they held in their hands, and they used it.
Now, the students do not visibly see when it comes out. They are notified electronically, but that notice may fly right by their attention span.
Skyler likes carrying the paper to class. She finds it inconvenient to go online.
Too frequently, newspapers and magazines fight this battle looking solely at the cost equation. That’s not the best way to go about it. They aren’t thinking of how many readers they will LOSE by going this route.
And isn’t it all about the readership? You publish something with the idea of someone reading it.
There’s a fundamental desire to hold paper tangibly in your hands. It’s comforting. It gives you a sense of ownership. It allows you to peruse different sections at your leisure. You control the tempo.
The decision to eliminate paper copies of newspapers from distribution is not about the next generation wanting to be online and get every nugget on their smartphone. It’s also not about cost.
When the decision-makers have to come down on one side or the other, they should think about their audience and why a person chooses to pick a paper up from a newsstand – the cup of coffee purchased there, the chatter with the guy behind the counter are as important to the day as reading. When these choices are framed differently, we might reach different conclusions.
From there, we went out to the printers. Our editor got to do the duty, but once or twice I went as a backup, and it was fascinating to see the paper get laid out and printed off the press.
When we delivered the paper to our fellow students, they had something tangible in their hands, a product we were proud of. That feeling is going away.
Recently, the high school our last two kids are attending decided to phase out the printed version of their newspaper and go to an electronic-only format. This is nothing new if you are in the newspaper, magazine, newsletter or book business. You know that print -- where we turn pages with our fingers and feel paper while we do so rather than slide to the next story electronically -- is going out of business.
Companies and associations that put out newsletters grapple regularly with the “cost vs. convenience” issue. It costs less to send it electronically, but many people find the convenience of carrying around a newsletter or newspaper more conducive to reading it at their discretion.
This conflict has been around for multiple years and is still not fully resolved. When you have remote workers, they cannot read online. There are still, believe it or not, people who don’t have computers (laptop or desktop) at home. They may have a smartphone, but the reading screen is so small it detracts from the stories.
As a newspaper and magazine kinda guy, I love turning the pages and burying my face in a good story. It’s pleasant. So when I hear of high schools eliminating their school paper in hard copy and putting it online, it’s bothersome.
Interestingly, our younger daughter Skyler (Read: Next Generation) is against the electronic version, too. Maybe collectively we’ll be able to argue for the retention of paper copies.
Here’s her two cents: When the school used to publish the paper in hard copies, the students knew when it came out. It was placed at their disposal at multiple locations, they’d grab a copy and read it when they had down time. It was a product they held in their hands, and they used it.
Now, the students do not visibly see when it comes out. They are notified electronically, but that notice may fly right by their attention span.
Skyler likes carrying the paper to class. She finds it inconvenient to go online.
Too frequently, newspapers and magazines fight this battle looking solely at the cost equation. That’s not the best way to go about it. They aren’t thinking of how many readers they will LOSE by going this route.
And isn’t it all about the readership? You publish something with the idea of someone reading it.
There’s a fundamental desire to hold paper tangibly in your hands. It’s comforting. It gives you a sense of ownership. It allows you to peruse different sections at your leisure. You control the tempo.
The decision to eliminate paper copies of newspapers from distribution is not about the next generation wanting to be online and get every nugget on their smartphone. It’s also not about cost.
When the decision-makers have to come down on one side or the other, they should think about their audience and why a person chooses to pick a paper up from a newsstand – the cup of coffee purchased there, the chatter with the guy behind the counter are as important to the day as reading. When these choices are framed differently, we might reach different conclusions.
