The New York Times won four and the Star Tribune two. Having just wrapped up a session on pay walls at the NAA mediaXchange conference in Orlando, one that included discussion of both the Times and the Star Tribune, I wondered about a few connections.
What could the relationship be? How could we think about those links between Pulitzers, pay walls, and investing in newsrooms?
Amid the kind of expense cutting that swept almost the entire industry, in both the recession years and the aftermath, the Star Tribune is one of a relative few that made a point of keeping its reporting staff as whole as possible. It disproportionately made its newsroom cuts in copy handling and middle management in order to do that.
|Newsroom expense as a percent of total newspaper expenses|
The downward turn, even as small as it is, is glaring. Given how much less all newspapers spend on printing and newsprint, given circulation declines, one might expect that newsroom expenditures’ share would have risen a bit, as they have in Minneapolis. Instead, they’ve declined.
Some newspapers have held on to more newsroom capacity than others — how will their fledgling pay-wall plans fare?
What further correlations can we draw now that we increasingly have lots of numbers at our fingertips?
How do the new ways to present news, like the Pulitzer-winning Times feature Snow Fall, spark or reinforce sales?