<< News 2.0 | Newpaper reading most impacted by the Internet - Ofcom report and Metrica research >>

Future of the news poll: The results!

by Paul 12/3/2008 9:42:00 AM

Over the past month we have been asking you, the readers of Measurement Matters, to get involved in our poll on the future of the news. Thanks to all who voted and commented, there were some interesting perspectives shared. And now (drumroll please) the results...

Responses to the first question showed a strong attachment to the national print press, as over half of respondents think there will always be demand for a print version. Of course, there is an assumption that this demand will be met by publishers, which may not necessarily be the case given falling revenues and a wider pool of competition. Only three of the four options given were chosen, with no one of the opinion that national papers will follow the Christian Science Monitor's lead and go online only within the next two years.

Echoing the results of question 1, no participant believes regional papers will be online only within the next two years either. However, only a third of respondents believe we will always have a print version of regional papers. Almost a third expect regional papers to go online only within five years reflecting the dire financial predicament regional publishers currently face.

The thrid question asked where people expect to source their news in the future. Almost two-thirds of Measurement Matters readers still expect to use established media brands, like the BBC and Wall St journal, to receive their news. These big media providers have a strong position to work from and how they continue to develop and integrate their brand with online and mobile technologies will be crucial to their future success or failure.

This poll has now closed but you can continue to take part in the future of news discussion through Paul Hender's new post on News 2.0.

Tags: media, news 2.0, web 2.0, roy greenslade, online news, bbc, wall street journal, measurement matters, metrica

media analysis | media evaluation | social media measurement and analysis | social media news | the press

Best of breed media monitoring, PR measurement and social media analysis unitesAccording to a survey in the Daily Telegraph yesterday, Monday October 26th is the most un...When social media can't be trusted, what are the implications for social media measurement?As news stories break from within social networks, the question of who we can trust becomes ever mor...Print media's future is here. Is your media monitoring and media analysis ready? “We have the luxury — the opportunity — of making a leap that most n...

Comments

12/5/2008 9:14:22 AM

I think news is like wine. There's too much. You will never be able to read it all. That's why you need to have a filter. By a filter I mean someone, or something that knows what you like, or what you need, and filters out everything else, and gives you the important bits. You need filters that you trust.

One of my filters is Monocle. A magazine started by Tyler Brûlè, that is a "Briefing on Global Affairs, Business, Culture and Design". It gives me in a month just what I need. What I do in addition to that is try and follow some of journalists, photographers, designers, adventurers that write for the magazine.

I found this method of finding a filter that I trust to be really good to keep me up to date.

Darryl

12/5/2008 10:48:54 AM

Great point Darryl. A filter is definitely useful in today's fragmented media landscape. It would be interesting to see what proportion of the 23% of people who plan to use Google Alerts (or similar) to get their news are doing so because of that functionality.

The trust issue is possibly an even more crucial aspect and I suspect that that is the reason two-thirds of respondents are planning to stick with the established media brands.

PaulK