The incredible shrinking Journal Star

They’ve taken an axe to the staff. They’ve cut out whole sections of the paper, and reduced some sections to as few as four pages. What else can they cut at this point?

Why, the width of the paper, of course. It seems the paper is getting a bit more narrow:

“Readers will notice that the width of each page of the newspaper will be reduced by 1 1/2 inches [starting in October]. The depth of the pages will remain the same.

“This format is fast becoming the industry standard […] Readers in markets where the narrower format has been introduced have said they prefer the ‘feel’ and portability.”

The current format is about 12½ inches wide, so that works out to about a 12% reduction in newsprint. I wonder if they’ll be lowering their subscription price by 12% to compensate. (Not!) I love the way they try to sell this reduction in content: It’s preferred by readers! It’s more portable! It feels better! Kind of an insult to their readers’ intelligence, no?

I predict the Journal Star will abandon broadsheet publication altogether in a few years, opting for tabloid format. The Chicago Tribune already prints a version of its paper in tabloid format for sale at airport and train station newsstands. And this is the popular format for newspapers “across the pond,” too, meaning it’s becoming the “industry standard” of tomorrow.

And then, eventually, it will be reduced to the size you see on the left.

35 thoughts on “The incredible shrinking Journal Star”

  1. I was in Indianapolis recently and picked up their paper which looks to be the size the PJS will shrink to – it seemed tiny. You just know that they will cut story length. I bet that the 4 page sections will still just be 4 pages after resizing. This is just another bait and switch – telling us now how great it will be but the change will make it inferior. It is like everything these days; more cost and less product.

  2. wouldn’t be so bad if they cut out the propaganda pieces and just reported the news.

  3. “Also, the size of our primary typography – known as “body type,” used in stories like this one – will not be reduced.”

    The type size won’t be reduced, but the paper size will. That pretty much says it all.

  4. Like it or not, the Journal-Star is a business. If they have to go to drastic measures, such as reducing the actual size of the paper to make it more cost-effective, so be it. Of course it’s a shame, but newspapers in print are quickly becoming nostalgia.

    Do we similarly lament the decline of the phone book? Or telephone switchboard operators? News in print needs to adapt to new technologies and media. The newspaper meant a lot more when we didn’t have smartphones that get news updates instantly or when there weren’t at least four channels on basic cable that update the news 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

    And the irony of lamenting about the decline of newspapers on a locally-popular internet blog that defines itself as “a compilation of news (including some original reporting), analysis and opinion” has not been lost on me. While I don’t believe that citizen journalism such as this fine blog will ever fully replace local media, it has definitely been a proverbial “game-changer”.

    The Constitution provides for freedom of the press, but it does not guarantee us the right to a press. For better or worse, the news media is an industry, an industry that must provide goods that the public wants to purchase for consumption. If the Journal-Star can’t balance their own budget, they aren’t going to continue running at a loss just so we can hold onto our nostalgic views on the glory age of newspapers.

    If that means more drastic measures like cutting down to a tabloid format or cutting out a full day of circulation (say, Saturdays), so be it. While it indeed does seem tragic that our only official newspaper of record becomes thinner by the day, progress marches on and the Journal-Star, like just about every other business out in the market today, has to find ways to stay both relevant and profitable in this economy.

    Besides, what’s our alternative? A government-subsidized newspaper?

  5. Since newspapers are now written at a 6th grade level, they won’t be using such big words and complicated sentences…

    They are considering going to the same format as Theodore Geisel’s works.

  6. I, also, like the idea of the smaller size–but I fear the “thickness” of the paper will not increase nor will the content of news, etc.

  7. Diane — Yes. I didn’t spend a lot of time on it, but it looks good enough to get the point across. 🙂

    Sterling — Yes, the Journal Star is a business and all that stuff you said. Nevertheless, (1) raising prices and cutting content is a sure way to lose subscriber base, and (2) is it the Journal Star that isn’t bringing sufficient profits, or is it being cannibalized by GateHouse Media? I suspect it’s more the latter.

  8. NV: Hum, was it Dr. Suess or PM Magazine that Charlie was implying … I wonder …..

  9. CJ, I hope you are friends with the States Attorney, or I hope your background is clean.

  10. CJ – I fully agree with your concerns regarding GateHouse’s possible cannibalization of the PJS. However, even if they run the Journal Star into the ground (and so far, so good), as long as there’s a market for the news, there’ll be a new newspaper to spring up to take its place.

    This may be a case of things needing to get worse before they’ll get any better.

  11. I visited the UK this past Christmas and loved seeing newsboys hawking competing afternoon editions as folks came out of the tube stations. The print concept there is definitely not dead yet.

    Also didn’t John Lennon get into trouble when he said, “The religion section will vanish. It will disappear.”

  12. CJ, your premise is right on.

    It is NOT that the PJS that is losing $$; it is still profitable, but it is the golden goose for other Gatehouse operations that are hemorrhaging $$. They (GH) are killing a profitable enterprise to save the Gatehouse execs butts and high salaries. And pay off the huge debt they took on to buy all these papers. PJS is the biggest paper they bought and they don’t know how to manage it AT ALL.

    None of the recent changes (content, size, price, staffing) have originated at the PJS. The PJS is operating with significantly less staff and resources and has to account for operating $$ that no other GH or local paper has to account for. So it would be nice if ppl would cut the local paper a little slack as they are subjugated to their corporate masters. Plus they have the burden of actually having to conform to journalistic ethics, unlike many bloggers (not YOU, CJ!)so they can’t print something based on rumors even when they know it’s true. They have to have attributable sources even if they are unnamed.

    I am not talking about editorial content per se, but when something breaks on someone’s beat who is working 60-plus hours with additional responsibilities and it’s not online within 20 minutes when someone with no life who trolls the news scrolls posts something (that may or may not be accurate…) don’t rip the PJS person a new one.

    Trust me on this one. Been there.

  13. To the writer of the article: So what do you suggest they do? You seem to be quick to criticize. Let’s hear some solutions presented as well. For the record I don’t subscribe to the PJ Star nor do I really care either way. Just seems like you are awfully cynical about a lot of things on here. And that’s your right. (I know – if I don’t like it don’t read it.) But it would be nice to hear more offers of solutions and less complaints. Thank you and have a good day.

  14. Question,

    If you REALLY took the time to read the posts on this blog, you would realize that most people DO offer solutions, and a great deal of insight…….

    How can you fix it…if you don’t know whats broken?

    For example, nontimendum is broken………

  15. New Voice – Take it easy. I was addressing the writer of the article, not the commentators. That’s why I prefaced my comment with ‘To the writer of this article’

  16. Question — I think the solution is fairly obvious: I’d like them to stop decreasing the value of their paper and give subscribers (like me) more bang for their buck. If not, then the next solution is to cancel my subscription. I presume they wouldn’t like that, but maybe they don’t care. Perhaps they’re making so much money that they can afford to lose long-time subscribers.

    Another suggestion I’ve given before is that they stop providing their content for free on the web — put it behind a pay wall that is accessible by print subscribers and (for a smaller fee) web-only subscribers.

  17. Thank you for the response and the candor. It is appreciated. I think the free web content aspect you brought up is something a lot of newspapers will have to consider as times continue to be tough financially.

    Hope you have a good day.

    New Voice – Coffee is always good! Have a good day as well.

  18. There’s no better way for me to start the day than sitting down
    with a cup of coffee, and opening to read the newspaper…online.

  19. I do not agree with CJ’s suggestion that “they stop providing their content for free on the web.” Web content – wherever possible – should be and should remain free. I’m passionate about that. The PJS just needs to sell more ads for the Web. And find ways to make us view them. That’s better than odious subscription renewals, password hints, etc. God save us.

  20. And one more point: ads can provide information, entertainment, and value. And they should. Password hints, not so much.

  21. I am with CJ. PJS info should be premium info and should have a cost to it if provided on-line unless you have a hard copy subscription.

  22. In other news, the incredile expanding price of the newly contructed Robert F. Kennedy Community School at price tag of $578 million ….. ka-ching!

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100822/ap_on_re_us/us_taj_mahal_schools

    “There’s no more of the old, windowless cinderblock schools of the ’70s where kids felt, ‘Oh, back to jail,'” said Joe Agron, editor-in-chief of American School & University, a school construction journal. “Districts want a showpiece for the community, a really impressive environment for learning.”

    Not everyone is similarly enthusiastic.

    “New buildings are nice, but when they’re run by the same people who’ve given us a 50 percent dropout rate, they’re a big waste of taxpayer money,” said Ben Austin, executive director of Parent Revolution who sits on the California Board of Education. “Parents aren’t fooled.”

  23. “The PJS just needs to sell more ads for the Web.”

    So… let someone else pay for you to read the paper? How Socialist of you.

  24. Has anyone else noticed that that the JS has switched back to dirty ink again? After reading the paper last Sunday and today our fingers are quite dirty like they used to be.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.