On-line Newspapers

What's with them? Ok, I read a few of them, namely because either I'm too lazy to buy or subscribe to the paper every day or because they're not available locally. I know I've ranted or vented before about them, but the local, Tacoma and Seattle, ones (3, Tacoma News Tribune, Seattle PI and Seattle Times), really suck. I don't mean kinda' suck, but really suck, pure visual overkill.

It's like they're addicted to filling every space and more on a Web page with something, some news story, images, ads, etc., and they're long, The Seattle Times is 5+ page (1024 length x 900 width) scrolls of stuff, and the other two are 3+ page scrolls of stuff. Give the reader a break. It's like they want you to take up residence on the home page for hours or something, reading and following all the links.

But the problem is that 80-90% of the news is repackaged news from other sources. None of the three have reporters beyond the Puget Sound excepting some in New York or DC, but mostly travelling there. The Seattle PI simply shut down all news operations except local and state news when they went to an non-paper on-line format after closing down.

So what are they good for? Well, local news, government, events, arts, sports, etc., the stuff you expect. After that, they're a waste of time and space when you can get the news from the source or from better news Websites. And the sad reality is that none do what I expect, offer a daily version with just the news duplicated in the print edition. All major newspapers do it except USA Today, and that's another rant.

So it's impossible to sort out what really news, like today, or just something kept on-line. It's why it's called a daily newspaper, like they can't duplicate that with the links to the stories. The New York Times and Washington Post do it for free (probably subscription in the future like the Wall Street Journal). Those on-line papers are clear and easy to navigate and read both today's news and sections.

But the local ones just want to bludgeon your eyes and mind to death. No wonder Google has a good customer base for the daily alert e-mails for specific searches. I use it for "Mount Rainier National Park" and get through all the hype, crap and junk of the on-line newspapers. Try searching that on their Websites every day. Whew!!

Anyway, I'm done, and more or less done with them, unless it's a specific topic or issue. Otherwise, I'll buy the daily paper, maybe. Ok, Sundays for sure, but then that issue is geting sparse for the price. And some of the other days are only worth it for the pullout section.

And if they bitch about losing customers, so be it (although the Seattle Times is now profitable when it picked up half the former PI readers by picking up some of their sections and comics and moving to the center right instead of middle to far right editorially). It's not hard noticing the print editions are half their size a year or so ago and costing half gain more.

I'm waiting for the day they all go to non-paper on-line only versions with subscription. It's the model that seems to work for those who use it (eg. Wall Street Journal). It's about the repeat customer, you want them coming back and you want new customers. That takes reinvention and innovation, obviously lacking with the local on-line newspapers.

You have to create some degree of uniqueness which the customer wants. It's why the Christian Science Monitor and Wall Street Journal have additional services for a subscription. And you have to create ease of navigation, both reading and searching the Website. What good is a newspaper you can't find the news?

So, while I may read the print edition of the Seattle Times once or twice a week, they, and the new on-line only Seattle PI, can park their Websites as far as I'm concerned. I'll get my news from the other newspapers and use Google's news search engine.