We’ve always advised newspaper companies to think of themselves as content producers and information clearinghouses who have thus far relied mainly on print to disseminate their product, and henceforth should look at digital distribution.  For more on that click here.  I definitely do not think that we are alone in that, nor were we the first one to say so.  Over the past 20 years or so, there has been some mergers and acquisitions in the print and TV space as owners have tried to reap synergies in these two media.

One area that I think newspaper companies have overlooked is wireless. 

I also do not think that you are hearing the death knell for newspaper companies.  Much like last year all media firms were stalling in neutral or seeing share prices fall, this year many of them are making a comeback, whether you are judging by their income statements or stock charts (think Disney for the former, News Corp. for the latter).

Point is: everything is cyclical to some extent.  Newspapers have tremendous financial firepower and they are only a deal or two - or major investment or two - to get their mojo back.  While the option of going private is a valid one (so they need not think more of pleasing Wall Street than their readers and ad clients), the truth is that they need some novel ideas and a new approach to risk-taking.

There is certainly a malaise amongst the literati who feel that they have a God-given right to be relevant in social, business and cultural circles and today’s state of matters has challenged that “right.”  But as we have seen in a few case studies, when the newspaper companies take a stab at something and give it a good shot, they can threaten any online player; think CareerBuilder.com.

Of course, they also tend to slow things down.  Is it a coincidence that Topix seems to have slowed down last year when it obtained a massive investment from the major newspaper companies?  Wasn’t it a high flying, fast rising property that lost some of its mojo in the past year?  Could it be that the newspaper’s investments inadvertantly or directly hampered its growth?  For an illustration of what we mean by slowdown:

In March 2005, the Knight Ridder, Tribune Company and Gannett media companies purchased a 75% stake in Topix.  I think it’s a great service, but by the looks of it, the company’s traffic seems to have been stuck within a tight range for a full year after that investment (Alexa’s not 100% reliable of course, but still, the image does suggest a slowdown after the March 2005 investment):

The key challenge for newspapers is this bridge: how can they ensure that I continue to view them as relevant and how do they ensure that the next generation is even aware of them?

My parents own a little hotel in the city, I go see them on weekends, have breakfast with them.  I try to spend every second I am there talking to my parents.  But at some point, I grab the newspaper and see what’s going on away from the blogosphere (we all need to do that once in a while, more often than not).

It makes me think of how much newspapers have a lock on people early in the morning.  At least they did.  Which got me to think: newspapers are dirty.  How can I possibly be holding such an inkball when I am touching toast?  Then it hit me:

Why don’t newspapers invest or partner up with either:

- hardware companies (PDA devices, cell phone companies like Palm, Nokia, Motorola etc.)
- wireless service providers (Verizon, Cingular etc)

and give them their content and feed all of their news and content through these partners to reach consumers.  I always have my Treo with me.  I’d much rather get information through that than read a messy newspaper.  This would also be a major selling point: say I have no idea what to choose between Cingular and Verizon but one offers free content, updated throughout the day from The New York Times company.  That would be a major point, knowing that every time I turn on my cell phone or PDA, there’s new, quality content from the NYT’s companies. 

I know what you’re thinking: they’re already doing this. 

But are they?  There are things like AvantGo but that’s not the same thing at all.  You can also subscribe for updates, alerts etc.  But these are like trying to save the Titanic by removing water from the ship one bucket at a time. 

I am talking about making this a default feed, available to all buyers of a given hardware or subscribers to a given phone plan.  It’s free, it’s there, you can access it if you want. 

By doing this, they remain relevant to me, and ensure that my little brother’s generation also gets their content.  Like I said, ever since I began to wurf the Web, I would visit newspapers’ websites.  My little brother’s generation?  Don’t count on it.  But my making the content available on wireless, consumers engage with the content and then will develop a habit of accessing those sites from work, home etc., this will lead to higher traffic audiences and more revenue.

Newspapers make a lot of money from advertising, so they could run ads or find sponsors to piggyback on the content.  Are there risks to such an endeavor?  Of course, but not doing much and trying to get people to buy newspapers is a bigger risk: after all, I will probably not subscribe to any newspaper ever again, and every time a magazine subscription expires, I do not renew it.  I go to newspapers’ websites and have a plethora of other free options.  But relying only on their websites is a limited strategy, why not tap into the ever increasing wireless market and really seize the market.

This would not only be a sound local (ie. American) strategy but as wireless companies aggressively enter global markets like Russia, China, India and South America, it can allow deep-pocketed but shell-shocked newspaper companies to access an entirely new market with their content.

If you know of any companies that already do this, by all means let me know.

• Digg this Blog
• Share on Facebook
• WatchMojo on Twitter
• WatchMojo on YouTube
• Add to Favorites
• WatchMojo Newsletter