Is there a future for The Daily? According to last week’s reports by The New York Observer and The New York Times, News Corp’s “tablet newspaper” is on probation: Rupert Murdoch might pull the plug on The Daily which looses $30 million a year. But, in an open email to the publication’s staff, Jesse Angelo, its editor-in-chief, was quick to deny such rumors.
Eighteen months ago, The Daily was held up as embodying the newsmedia’s future. It was the first to be designed for the iPad, it bore the blessing of Steve Jobs himself (quite notable for someone who usually loathed the news sector), and it had the backing of the deep-pocketed News Corporation conglomerate. The project’s success would be measured over time (five years), supported by a considerable amount of funding. It had all it needed to be a success.
Fact is, The Daily never took-off. Six months after its high-wattage launch, it only claimed 80,000 paid-for subscribers. Today, Jesse Angelo mentions a mere 100,000 subs. It is both far from the 500,000 necessary to break-even and totally out of step with the growth of the iPad (and the iPhone, and the Android) installed base.
Something’s wrong with The Daily’s concept.
I subscribed. Twice, actually. At 99 cents a week ($39.99 a year), it was supposed to be a painless addition to my vast set of digital subscriptions. Strangely, it never succeeded in becoming part of my reading habits.
For The Daily, this might be its first problem: It is everything and nothing special at the same time. It’s not a tabloid, but it doesn’t carry in-depth, enterprise journalism either. It’s a sophisticated container for commodity news — i.e. the news that you can get everywhere, in real-time and for free. If I crave celebrity fodder, I go to TMZ or to the Huffington Post. If I want business news, I’ll find everything on CNN Money or Business Insider, all very efficiently and appealingly edited. No need to go through the tedious download of a 100 pages-plus issue.
The Daily’s inherent competition with the web (and mobile) was completely underestimated. Real time is now mandatory, so is the ability to generate conversations. For The Daily, a comparison of last weekend’s newscycle is cruel. Its coverage of the Mitt Romney tax return controversy triggered 179 comments on The Daily vs. 28,464 comments on the Huffington Post. (Note the HuffPo built it on a 150 words Associated Press story and a one minute video segment from CNN — that’s the digital version of the multiplication of the loaves…)
The Daily is like an old concept in a high-tech package. Some draw a parallel with USA Today, the first truly national newspapers launched in 1982. Two things made the paper a success: its positioning as the first truly national newspaper in the United States, and its innovative format and layout; USA Today was designed for quick reads and explanatory journalism enhanced by graphics. That uniqueness was key to installing the paper America’s news landscape.
By contrast, The Daily does not enjoy the specificity of a “visually attractive convenience”. Its sophistication and its cognitive profusion lead to an excess of complexity which ends up leveling its content off. The Daily has no asperities, nothing to retain the reader’s attention in a recurring manner. A media is driven by its affinity for its audience. An intellectual, cultural or political affinity — or a combination of all three. The Daily lacks such engines. Even its Murdoch-induced anti-Obama stance fails to keep readers coming back.
Another key question for The Daily’s future pertains to its business model. On average, according to the Newspaper Association of America, 70% of the revenue of US dailies comes form advertising, and 14% of the ad revenue comes from digital. By any means, The Daily should have been loaded with ads. There is almost none. Including for the new “WKND” edition. This is worrisome: many papers draw a third or half of their revenue of their weekend editions. The per-copy price won’t help either. At 99 cents a week, it’s pocket change. After Apple’s 30% cut, this leaves less than 10 cents per issue. Even with a streamlined newsroom of 150, it can’t fly. (For more about The Daily’s economics, read Ken Doctor’s January 2011 Newsonomics article, or last week’s piece by Staci Kramer in PaidContent, both explain the issue pretty well.)
The Daily also illustrates the difficulty in building a digital media brand. Many tried, few succeeded. Slate, Salon, excellent as they are, journalistically speaking, never took off audience-wise. The Huffington Post made it through a unique combination of unscrupulous “aggrelooting” of contents from a variety of willing and unwilling sources, legions of unpaid bloggers, Arianna’s media footprint, and unparalleled audience-building techniques (see the previous Monday Note: Transfer of Value). A combination that proved very complicated to reproduce — even for someone as resourceful as Rupert Murdoch.
The Australian-born media mogul thought he could launch a new breed of news product from scratch. But in his quest for bold digital efficiency, he failed to see that a news product with no history, no breadth, no soul, no character could only face an uncertain future.
– frederic.filloux@mondaynote.com
Related columns:
- Neil Budde: From Yahoo to the Daily Me TweetFrom Yahoo to the Daily Me In the Internet publishing world, Neil Budde is seen as both a pioneer and a reference. He created the Online Wall Street Journal that now enjoys one million subscribers. Then he left for Yahoo!, raising speculations that the search company will make a major move into publishing (it didn’t [...]...
- Daily Telegraph opens its own tech lab TweetIn the digital world, speed is key. And in the media world, being digital is key to survival. For this reason, The Telegraph Media Group is setting up its own technology lab. It will be initially staffed with three people, going to ten by year end. They will explore how to mix-up news and user-generated [...]...
8 Comments
Yes, the generic “newspaper” has a hard time competing with the lowest common denominator. But even the high-end paywalled stuff faces stiff competition, plus having to operate in the rarified atmosphere of high-level users who are willing to pay for quality, in-depth journalism (or just plain, good writing).
.
It seems it might take 10 years or more before we complete the transition from a world where ads promise a subsistence existence to bloggers and aggregators and pro media starves, into one where a site chooses some combo of these three modes:
1. Paywalled, possibly teasered.
2. Closed communities with sufficient privacy controls that users trust giving Google/etc their private info necessary to make ads work.
3. Trash, ad-festooned sites for those indifferent to premium services.
“Something’s wrong with The Daily’s concept.”
Yes, people won’t pay for news. Many of us said so when The Daily started.
It’s not the concept of providing digital news, that lacks, it’s the gadget!!!
You don’t want to see reflections, you don’t want blinking and flashing pages.
You want to concentrate on reading.
Reading a daily ‘newspaper’ on a kindle (e.g.) can easily be part of your life, as it is in my life, here in Europe!
That Mr Murdoch “failed to see that a news product with no history, no breadth, no soul, no character could only face an uncertain future.” is not a choice he had with creating a new media title, how else?
I’m sure Mr Murdoch understands that new media brands take time to be established.
He has lots of critics yet few notice that he is trying different models of publishing online, he is putting his money on the line, which is far more impressive than the risk-free digital ink his critics use. I’m not a fan of his political views or his lax ethics but I am an admirer of his energy and stubborn persistence to try new business models during what are incredibly challenging times for the entire global media industry.
Le Figaro has placed in its paying part the story in depth of Albert Londres. This kind of quality journalism is the way.
The WSJ site is awful and I’d daresay if a Murdoch site didn’t have momentum behind it from another medium, it would fail. Like The Daily. The company culturally still knows nothing about the web. The Daily is just the purest example.
Digital skews towards the free. As FF notes, you can do far better via surfing than what you pay for for The Daily.
I too, subscribed twice, really hoping this would take off. Meh. It’s nothing special and the long download times every morning put me off it. If it were instant, like an RSS reader, with only a few long stories to download (if and when I chose to do so), then I might have stuck with it. But my mornings are too short and to your point Frédéric, it’s not giving me news I can’t get a thousand other places.
Thank you a bunch for sharing this with all of us you really recognise what you are speaking about! Bookmarked. Please additionally discuss with my web site =). We can have a hyperlink exchange contract between us
14 Trackbacks
[...] tiene 100.000 suscriptores, pero pierde 30 millones de dólares al año, según un artículo de Monday Note, que recoge datos de The New York Observer y The New York Times. Para que el Daily fuera [...]
[...] no character could only face an uncertain future.” Frederic Filloux, TheMondayNote – “Why Murdoch’s The Daily Doesn’t Fly“ (16.7.2012) [...]
[...] on http://www.mondaynote.com Sharen mit:TwitterFacebookTumblrPinterestEmailMoreLinkedInLike this:LikeBe the first to like [...]
[...] his latest Monday Note, Filloux teases out the lessons from The Daily, which he sees as a flawed [...]
[...] tablets, pode encerrar sua curta carreira no final de 2012, de acordo com informações dos sites Monday Note e Meio & [...]
[...] Os problemas enfrentados pelo The Daily (que serão comentados no blog) Be Sociable, Share! Tweet This entry was posted in Sem categoria and tagged mobilidade, [...]
[...] that proved very complicated to reproduce — even for someone as resourceful as Rupert Murdoch.[1] http://www.mondaynote.com/2012/0…Comment Loading… • Post • 1m ago Add [...]
[...] launched, for many readers I expect it is merely a hassle. Publishing veteran Jean-Louis Gassee put it well in a post at The Monday Note about The Daily’s flaws, saying: “It is everything and nothing special at the same [...]
[...] launched, for many readers I expect it is merely a hassle. Publishing veteran Jean-Louis Gassee put it well in a post at The Monday Note about The Daily’s flaws, saying: “It is everything and nothing special at the same [...]
[...] launched, for many readers I expect it is merely a hassle. Publishing veteran Jean-Louis Gassee put it well in a post at The Monday Note about The Daily’s flaws, saying: “It is everything and nothing special at the same [...]
[...] launched, for many readers I expect it is merely a hassle. Publishing veteran Jean-Louis Gassee put it well in a post at The Monday Note about The Daily’s flaws, saying: “It is everything and nothing special at the same [...]
[...] launched, for many readers I expect it is merely a hassle. Publishing veteran Jean-Louis Gassee put it well in a post at The Monday Note about The Daily’s flaws, saying: “It is everything and nothing special at the same [...]
[...] readers I expect it is merely a hassle. Publishing veteran Jean-Louis Gassee Frédéric Filloux put it well in a post at The Monday Note about The Daily’s flaws, saying: “It is everything and nothing special at the same time. It’s [...]
[...] readers I expect it is merely a hassle. Publishing veteran Jean-Louis Gassee Frédéric Filloux put it well in a post at The Monday Note about The Daily’s flaws, saying: “It is everything and nothing special at the same time. It’s [...]