You mention circulation declines and that is an interesting observation. In the US at the start of the decline, circulation also wasn’t declining at a sharp rate. In fact it was flat just like Australia is now. But circulation is extremely fuzzy (free copies, copies in hotel lobbies and rooms, professional freebies etc.). Basically, after the newspapers were forced into huge cuts in their business they decided to stop printing the circulation fluffing copies and so circulation ‘declined’. They also had to jack up cover prices and that contributed too. You can see how the AFR did after raising their rates to $3 in the most recent results.

I would not be at all surprised if the same plays out in Australia.

Ultimately though, we hold different views (you are optimistic and I am pessimistic) about the prospects of the Australian newspaper issue. Neither of us is right because we are talking about the future.

We don’t know what the future of newspapers will be, but Australian newspapers have been much more robust in circulation, ad revenue and readership than the US and the UK. Ditto N.Z.

I’m totally amazed that so many people (and they are not all oldies or baby boomers) continue to read print newspapers when they are available for free on line. Most of Australia’s circ declines were before the emergent of the internet and they are attributable to a number of factors including the evening TV newscast, more people driving to work (rather than taking public transport) etc etc. Unlike the US and UK we have had no loss of titles, or newspapers moving to online editions. I just don’t buy the argument we are following their footsteps and are 1-15 years behind. When newspapers begin charging for access to online sites, then the picture may change.

Readers are not deserting newspapers at anything approaching the rate of advertising customers. Dane Clausen in the “New directions”, Australian Journalism Review, 29 (2) has questioned the role of media buyers at advertising agencies for driving advertising to the internet despite high and solid numbers of consumers for newspapers and the unreliable and small numbers for websites. One could also question the role of scholars and commentators (at Crikey tc): have they also (unwittingly) influenced the migration of advertising?

BTW There was a very interesting article in yesterday’s Oz on NZ newspapers, and how they are faring … but can’t find it at the moment. We are in the middle of a heat wave, so I’m going to hop into a cold bath with a beer to cool off, as even the air conditioner is not helping.

There is no doubt I am a complete pessimist when it comes to the revenue growth prospects of newspapers of any kind in Australia.

The ‘Quality Metros’ are right there in Fairfax. I do think you are right: there are plenty of nuances. But also zoom out: They hardly matter at all. Every newspaper is declining in double digit rates at the moment, which puts huge pressures on companies that have debt (they only have to fail 50% say to be completely wiped out).

Also, I am not suggesting, I am presenting the reported financials of the newspaper companies. Are you saying that revenue at newspapers in Australia aren’t declining in the mid-teens year over year now?

“Significant structural differences” ? Sure. But a newspaper is still a newspaper, and whether that’s in the US, Europe or Australia, almost all of them are going down. The most significant question is how fast.

If you talk to people actually employed by a newspaper - and I do almost every day - they will tell you that it’s the most grim time they can remember. Doom and pessimism infect the whole chain from top to bottom. The occasional shred of good news is so eagerly promoted it just adds to the feeling of desperation.

So to say that Australian papers are “structurally different” is irrelevant. The tsunami is rolling in and it doesn’t make a lot of difference whether your house is made of sticks or bricks.

If you are differentiating regional and metro declines for Fairfax, then why not do the same for News Ltd? And what is far more important in this debate is the state of the ‘quality’ metros, so why not chart the ‘declines’ for The Australian, the AFR, The Age and the SMH. A different picture will emerge. The middle of the road dailies that try to appeal to everyone are suffering the most declines, particularly in circulation. So that skews the picture. BTW the free community papers are not declining. Their numbers are burgeoning. Any discussion of the future of newspapers that limits itself to figures of paid newspapers does not present the whole picture.

Also, there are only small declines in metro circulation this last quarter, but the cover cost of the Australia also increased … so there is more revenue.

Any discussion of the future of newspapers is much more nuanced than pessimists (such as Niki Scevak) allow, and usually reflects a curious North American and Eurocentric view of the press.