Comments on: The benefit of hindsight: Saving New Zealand’s newspapers

By: Fjyhjylj

Fjyhjylj — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 07:14:57 +0000

9wQyQ1 comment4 ,

By: Jim Tucker

Jim Tucker — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 05:58:18 +0000

Further thought: how much of Fairfax’s online ad agency Trade Me’s profit goes into paying for quality journalism by Fairfax?
When Fairfax bought Trade Me for $700 million a few years ago, we all thought they were crazy. Turned out to be a great move, since all the NZ classified advertising was migrating there. My beeting is the beancounters keep all the money separate and none of it assists with the fraught task of maintaining quality journalism.

By: Jim Tucker

Jim Tucker — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 05:53:29 +0000

Uh oh. The day after I published that blog, we’ve had the news that Fairfax (which owns 80 daily and community papers in NZ) has posted a loss approaching half a billion NZ dollars: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4856986a6034.html

The NZ division (Fairfax is an Oz company) performed badly. I quote from today Dom Post story:

Fairfax’s New Zealand publishing business recorded a 15 percent fall in revenue (or 11 percent in kiwi dollar terms) to A$223.9 million with ebitda down 29 percent, 26 percent in New Zealand dollar terms, to A$58.7 million. Group revenue, however, rose slightly to A$1.44 billion from A$1.43 billion.

Trade Me’s ebitda climbed 17 percent to NZ$38.2 million.

Fairfax said New Zealand advertising revenue fell 15 percent with circulation revenue up 3 percent and total costs cut 4 percent in an “extremely” recessionary environment.

Incidentally, the “reporter” the Dom Po sent to the US to “cover” the election was editor Tim Pankhurst, whose trip was funded by the US. I understand. He’s a terrific writer, but not sure he added anything. RadioNZ had its leading interviewer, Geoff Robinson from Morning Report, there on a similar trip. Similar result. Looked like nice junkets to me.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:26:48 +0000

Ah yes — my biggest bugbear (is that spelt right?!) with the NZ press. I remember having kittens when I saw a front page lead (about Obama becoming Democratic nominee) was syndicated from the LA Times. Terrible journalism — a staffer, even one based in Wellington — could have provided a piece that took into account the Kiwi audience. Christ — the difference in significance for LA readers is so big it’s almost a different story.

But you have to ask yourself — what are the syndication costs? Is it a model implemented before the days of freely available international news? I could understand if having a story written by an American paper was the only way — short of sending someone yourself, at great expense — to get a story. But that’s not the case any more… a a staffer in NZ can do the job.

By: Rosie Niven

Rosie Niven — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:18:37 +0000

Most of NZ's papers seem to syndicate from the foreign press for their overseas news. It's the same here in Oz. I seem to remember that the Dominion Post did send a reporter to the US to cover the election, but that was only because they got a bursary from somewhere! It's not just foreign news. The Age bought an article from the Telegraph about Twitter (containing very little new info - Stephen Fry is on Twitter, y'know?). Problem is, because it is written for a UK readership it neglects to mention that Australian users can't use their mobiles to post tweets. So while there may not be so much of a slump, it's scary to think where the savings will be made on these titles, given the paucity of foreign coverage and original features. Rosie Niven’s last blog post..How architects can’t solve every problem