edithhopegardenjournal

The News Corp’s launch of the tablet newspaper The Daily in February 2011 was heralded as the future of news and revealing opportunities for major new entrants in the news market. After a year and a half of operation, the digital newspaper has lost more than $30 million, managed to gain only 100,000 subscribers—not a trivial amount but low for a global player, and has just announced that it is cutting 1/3 of its editorial staff and ending original production of sports news and commentary. Journalistically The Daily is not a bad news product and its app is facile and effective. So why hasn’t it been more successful? The fundamental problem is that the digital-only paper has been overshadowed by the success of legacy print newspaper brands in the market for digitally delivered news. The Daily has never been so brilliantly written and edited that it could gain the significant attention and acclaim needed to overcome the brand advantages of legacy news providers. Major newspaper—such as Th

I recently forged my way the myriad of news reports on networks, papers, and web sites and discovered lots of attention-grabbing stories: Reuters had a story about the death of Mickey Rourke’ 18-year-old pet chihuahua. CBS News reported on cart that transforms into a sleeping tent for the homeless. Associated Press told me that Twitter was limiting message length and intending to start testing ways to make money. The New York Times informed me about people walking and running in stairwells as a means of keeping fit. CNN reported that Lance Armstrong’s stolen bicycle had been recovered. The Los Angeles Times reported on a city council candidate criticizing a rival for being defense attorney that represented a client who was accused of shooting a sea lion four years ago. ABC News carried a story on its website about efforts to produce cola containing cow urine in India. MSNBC reported that Starbucks is increasing the products its offers in offers as part of an effort to improve its perfo