I wish I could find it -- someone quipped earlier today in my Twitter stream that "there is no business model" for killing print. That's right.
When you see Newsweek packing it in, or a newspaper like the Seattle Post-Intelligencer killing its print component, it's not a victory of digital success over dead-tree failure. It's a symptom of a broader problem with the publication's business. Online-only is an escape plan, not a success track.
This is not to say there won't come a time when killing print makes positive business sense. But I'm not seeing that now. Consider Newhouse curtailing print frequency in many of its markets. It's not killing print outright; it's cutting costs. And it's opening the way for competition.
Comments
Any examples of success from killing print?
Why bother?
Felix Salmon says it's not going to work ... so why bother?
In a Facebook post, Jay Rosen has an answer of sorts: "the demise of the print product implies the obsolescence of the knowledge that gave rise to the product. That's a hard fact to face."
killing print