Can the Evening Post Survive Media 2.0?

bristol | the environment | news report Friday April 17, 2009 16:01 by Media Watch

As local press takes a hit, can the Post's political isolation survive?

Welcome to South West Watch - keeping a beady eye on all that matters in this great region. This update from our Media Watch desk...

As we have been reporting all last year and this year, local media is in trouble. Deep trouble. The Daily Mail group's Northcliffe is going to axe 1000 jobs (though it still makes lots of money) and quite a few are to go locally at the Bristol Evening Post. New figures out do not help, major local media player, the US based Gannet (Who in turn own Newsquest, who in turn own a huge chunk of local papers such as Swindon Advertiser, the Cheltenham Independent, the Dorset Advertiser, Bridgwater Mercury and the Somerset County Gazette to name but a few.) has announced a 45% cut in ad revenue year-on-year and property ads are 50% down too.

Now contrast this with Craiglist, a listings site that has grown enormouly over the years - now a recent report noted that a staggering 97 of the top 100 classified sites are just localized versions of Craigslist, up from 88 just last year. Craiglist, which started as a tiny project and now has billions of readers, it primarily policed by the users, who for free, keep the site free of junk. The founder, Craig Newmark, sees the use the readers give in contributing to the site as a service and so keeps almost all of the site free to use in exchange. It also has a non-profit foundation that does good works. It is not a very capitalistic model of media. In December 2006, at the UBS Global Media Conference in New York, Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster told Wall Street analysts that Craigslist has little interest in maximizing profit, instead preferring to help users find cars, apartments, jobs, and dates.

So Web 2.0 can work for companies who work with their host communities. There are a number of very successful local news outfits what inspire their readers to join in, create a more open news system and provide some journalists with jobs.

So why can't the post look at this model? Back in the day, the Post has an almost total monopoly on media in the area. It could rant and piss-off anyone it liked, because when you needed a new job or to find a flat, you'd still need to buy the Post (or it's other off shoots). That is not the case any more. The Post rants at vegans, ignores the huge anti-war feeling in Bristol, attacks the radical left/libertarian/anarchist types, is gung-ho pro development but hates unions and so on. In short many of the very people who could help it survive now will feel no wish to do so, indeed may welcome it's demise. The Post's leadership have spent it's hay-making years alienating significant sections of its host city. While we at Media Watch feel for the people loosing their jobs, it was inevitable that as the new media rose and people could built their own media, the old would die back. Look at the huge rise in the green vote in the city from almost nothing a few years ago, to a serious political player today (even though the local party itself are not that well organised!) - this shows an ongoing change in the attitudes of the population.

The Post will remain, but as a rump speaking to a fraction of it's old audience in an ever decreasing ageing spiral. The interesting question is what will replace it?