Should Newspapers Reduce Print Runs?

Avatar Image
sp1814 | 08:27 Sun 29th Mar 2020 | News
32 Answers
We’ve been told to shop only for essentials, and to do so infrequently.

So why are newspapers still being published in volume? They have digital versions - why not switch production to those?

Not everyone has access to the Internet, so perhaps print runs could be reduced to (say) 30% for those without computers. Those who do, could to switch to their online content.

It would also mean that that the various functions that go to producing a print version of newspapers wouldn't have to come into work.


1 to 20 of 32rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Ooooph, you can’t deny the angry mob their tactile dose of daily doom
Not really the same, not all family members have their own tablet, and you can't always pencil in the sudoku possible answers on screen. Know what you mean, but contracting from the newspaper is likely low risk, and the public value it as essential to their mental well being.

Plus it gives them a chance to inadvertently block the loo.
Question Author

That's why I'm suggesting a reduced print run, rather than a complete ban.

As you say, there would still be a need for printed version of papers, but so many people could switch to online content that in these days of voluntary isolation, surely it would make sense?
If you do it for one the precedent is set for all. Also don't know the economics for shorter runs & distribution. Might be considered an all or nothing situation.

Maybe folk should be buying yesterday's paper, giving any virus 24 hours to die off ;-)
so how do you tell who needs a newspaper and who can do without one?
And what about the jobs that creating a newspaper entails, reducing a print by 30% also reduces those who work in the industry and that filters through to newsagents and those who deliver
Question Author

It wouldn't be down to the newspapers to determine who should get their papers. I'm saying that papers could announce a reduction in print runs, urging reader to turn to their online content.

The difference between people binge-shopping groceries and this is that there is an alternative to printed newspapers and the alternative supports isolation.
Question Author

Should newspapers continue to print at volume knowing that by doing so, they're putting peoples lives are at risk?

So many other companies have accepted the impact that this virus is going to have on their business and temporarily closed - surely newspapers need to alter their business models too?
they will if they're not selling. In the case of free newspapers, City AM has suspended publication; so has Time Out (currently a website called Time In). The Evening Standard has slashed its print run (it hasn't got to my suburb for a week).

But print circulation is plummeting anyway. The latest stats I can find are for November,but more recent figures are probably around somewhere
Question Author
Thanks jno. It makes sense that printed copies of newspapers aren’t selling as well as before the virus hit.

The problem the indumay have after the lockdown lifts is that many of its readers will have gotten used to reading content online ‘for free’.
Question Author
* The problem the industry may have
so perhaps print runs could be reduced to (say) 30% for those without computers. Those who do, could to switch to their online content.

Would you have prove you don't have online content to get a paper?
Reading the rest of the replies, this thread is proving to be a bit of a car-crash.
Those happy with online content will already use it, those looking for a paper will look.

There are more (ahem) pressing matters in the world.
Newspapers will soon reduce their print runs to avoid over production and reduce the amount of returns of unsold papers.
Personally I don't like reading online papers, much prefer a hard copy & Mrs Tony is not particularly computer literate.
Question Author

You wouldn't have to prove anything to anyone. The point of reducing production would not be to police distribution.
At times like this, newspapers are more vital than ever in informing and entertaining the masses. They should be increasing print runs, and selling them cheaply or giving them away.

If you are going to single out newspapers for curtailing, why not ban live TV and radio news Programmes? They Take hundreds of people to make, and repeats Could be Broadcast to entertain Viewers instead.
Newspapers make their money from advertising and sales. Lose 60% of sales and advertising income correspondingly drops and the paper becomes unviable and goes out of business forever.
Reducing print will save very little money, And the costs of producing it remain the same. So the Loss of economy of scale means that each issue will cost 3 times the cost To produce than they are selling it for.
Well they need to keep printing The Guardian so we all have some bog paper.

Seriously though surely it provides some comfort of normality for those who are in the more vulnerable category?

1 to 20 of 32rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Should Newspapers Reduce Print Runs?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.