If Only Newspapers Weren’t Dead

I just wish there was a way to make newspapers successful. I guess people just don’t read anymore:

E&Preported the other day thatThe New York Times,
for instance, had 17.4 million visitors to its Web site in June. It
reported yesterday that the average visitor spent 14 minutes and 29
seconds on the site that month (this appears to be an anomaly. ThatTimes stat is usually about twice that).

That means that readers collectively spent about 4.2 million hours on theTimes site in June.

The second biggest newspaper site, theLos Angeles Times, had
10.3 million visitors in June who spent an average 10 minutes and 53
seconds there. That works out to 1.9 million hours spent on latimes.com
in the month.

So how does that compare to time spent reading the paper?The New York Times
has 1.1 million subscribers (I averaged in Sunday circulation, which is
higher than daily) who the company says spend more thanthirty minutes a day with the paper. That’s 16.5 million hours per month, nearly four times the total time spent on New York Times Online.

But even this huge disparity underplays the print advantage. The Newspaper Association of Americasays each copy is read by 2.2 people a day (again, I averaged in Sunday to come up with that figure).

Now the NAA’s a trade group with an interest in high numbers, so
let’s be conservative and say it’s being optimistic by half and that
1.6 people read each copy per day. That brings the total time spent
with the printNYT to 26.4 million hours.

Anybody who can’t make enough money off that shouldn’t be allowed to operate a hot dog stand, much less a media corporation.