Conversation

Notices

pistolero (p@fsebugoutzone.org)'s status on Sunday, 02-Jun-2024 16:11:36 JST pistolero
@amerika @0 @FourOh-LLC @Hoss @PurpCat @dcc @dj @eriner @istvan @viber

> The average reader

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The "average reader" does not matter to a news publication: their average reader does, but it is not something they can measure very well, and it will necessarily be skewed because their readers are a self-selected subset of the population.

If there existed only one newspaper (and newspapers were compulsory), then you could infer some things about that newspaper's readers from a national study. The nationwide average reading level would be relevant. Then say that we droop the requirement that all citizen read a newspaper: do you think the average reading level of people that read the newspaper goes up or down? Then say we add a second newspaper, but it is a tabloid that focuses on celebrity news and gossip, it's got a full page dedicated to horoscopes and the crossword puzzle is replaced with a jumble: do you think if you took a representative sample of both papers' readers, you'd get the same average reading level?

In conversation about 6 months ago from fsebugoutzone.org permalink
- † top dog :pedomustdie: likes this.
- ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Monday, 03-Jun-2024 03:43:25 JST ≠
  in reply to
  @p @dcc @PurpCat @0 @eriner @istvan @viber @dj @FourOh-LLC @Hoss
  
  Papers vary, but the audience for newspapers in general -- which is now global -- needs to focus on a fifth-grade reading level or it cuts out too many people.
  
  Maybe the WSJ has smarter readers; I would like to think so. But even they dumb it down a lot these days.
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- pistolero (p@fsebugoutzone.org)'s status on Monday, 03-Jun-2024 03:43:25 JST pistolero
  in reply to
  @amerika @0 @FourOh-LLC @Hoss @PurpCat @dcc @dj @eriner @istvan @viber
  
  > needs to focus on a fifth-grade reading level or it cuts out too many people.
  
  The underlying assumption, that cutting people out is necessarily bad because everyone needs to shoot for total global dominance or there's no reason to care, is a bad one. There is no way to produce most things that are useful if you think about it that way. I don't read Pitchfork or the Lancet but watering them down isn't going to make me start.
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
  
  † top dog :pedomustdie: likes this.
- ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Monday, 03-Jun-2024 06:58:44 JST ≠
  in reply to
  @p @dcc @PurpCat @0 @eriner @istvan @viber @dj @FourOh-LLC @Hoss
  
  It's not about you. It's about an audience.
  
  Let's start there.
  
  You need maybe 30-300k readers to break even depending on the size of your paper.
  
  You aim for the largest audience segment you can.
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- pistolero (p@fsebugoutzone.org)'s status on Monday, 03-Jun-2024 06:58:44 JST pistolero
  in reply to
  @amerika @0 @FourOh-LLC @Hoss @PurpCat @dcc @dj @eriner @istvan @viber For a typical news-style newspaper, we can set aside that those are all owned by the same company now, but when print news was a bigger business, the partisan newspapers sold better (despite alienating half the market) than the watered-down papers. People want flavor.
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- Pawlicker (purpcat@clubcyberia.co)'s status on Monday, 03-Jun-2024 06:59:25 JST Pawlicker
  in reply to
  @p @amerika @dcc @0 @eriner @istvan @viber @dj @FourOh-LLC @Hoss a better example is look at CNN's ratings being in the toilet. Even Fox News after canning their top guy under pressure from a certain company that makes BP's PR campaign during the 2010s look like a joke (they just sued everyone instead of trying to run ads) is doing much better.
  https://www.yahoo.com/news/cnn-primetime-ratings-hit-three-172507650.html
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. CNN primetime ratings hit three-decade low as Mark Thompson searches for a strategy: ‘He’s thrown in towel regarding cable’
    
    The cable channel, which touts itself as "the most trusted name in news," drew just 83,000 viewers aged 25 to 54 during the week of May 13-19 from 8 to 11 p.m. -- its lowest-rated week since 1991, according to Nielsen.

Public

Notices

Feeds