Knut Olav ms

Newspapers: Innovate or die!

The good news for big print media is that demand for quality journalism has never
been so high. Yet they need to move with the new technology to continue doing
what they do best, writes Knut Olav ms, culture editor of the Norwegian daily
Aftenposten.

Seen from Scandinavia, the traditional media are by no means on the verge of
extinction. At any rate, their future is rather brighter than the gloomier
analysts, not to mention the many media pessimists, would have us believe. I
think we need some alternative perspectives.
I've been asked to speak from the viewpoint of an editor at a big newspaper
that used to appear only in print but that now faces quite another reality. True
enough, newspapers in several countries have major problems. For sure,
circulations might fall yet further, even in those countries in the world that read
newspapers most, such as Norway. Costs still need to be reduced and the speed
of innovation has to increase.
Innovation is the key word behind my relative optimism. It all depends on the
ability to transform. The best media organizations have this ability, along with
the will to realize it. They have understood that they need to think and act as
networks, learning every day from the new social media and vice versa.
There is already complex interaction between established and new media, from
hour to hour.
Big, traditional, mainstream media still supply national and international
readerships with first class journalism. Indeed, they still influence and change
our societies every single day.
Why? Because they still produce large amounts of quality journalism and have
the capacity to continue doing so. And the demand for quality journalism has
in no way disappeared. Readers are better educated than ever and hence are
more demanding customers and citizens.
They crave insight and reliable information from serious media organizations
that don't insult their intelligence. Figures in Scandinavia indicate that fewer
and fewer readers are looking for sensationalism. Newspapers that deliver that
really are in trouble. Many of them will probably be gone in not too many
years. But not the others.
So print media won't die out in the foreseeable future. Crisis? What crisis? For
sure, circulation numbers will continue to fall, but it's possible to adapt to that.
For sure, there will be profound changes but a total collapse? The history of
An article from www.eurozine.com

1/3

media technology indicates that technologies don't kill each other; rather, they
supplement one other, continuing to exist side by side.
I'm the editor for culture and oped for the print, web and all other platforms
we provide at Aftenposten. Seen from my chair, the new, innovative reality is
already here. Most of us still live in newspaperconsuming societies par
excellence. Norwegian newspapers provide a good example that it's possible to
thrive and survive. In Scandinavia there isn't as wide a gulf between quality
and "redtop" media as in England and Germany, for example. Perhaps there's
something to learn from that.
One of my concerns is that Aftenposten has many readers over the age of 50.
That could be seen as a very major problem. And it's a problem that we are
having a hard time attracting a younger readership. That is possibly our
greatest challenge.
However today's demographics tell us that many of the readers aged 50+ will
be alive and in good health until the age of 8090, and might continue reading
newspapers for the rest of their long lives. It would be a grave mistake to
forget them. We have to cater to them. Not only that: they are some of our
most demanding and critical readers. And we know that when we succeed in
communicating better with younger readers, we also communicate better with
older ones.
Another development newspapers are experiencing, taking my own paper as an
example, is an increasing number of readers on the web, as on cell phone/smart
phone based platforms. We coordinate on a daily basis with the social media,
and many of our journalists and editors are very active on Twitter and
Facebook. Social media give us ideas for stories and feedback from readers.
We are no longer monolithic media organizations but flexible networks.
I mentioned Schibsted, a Norwegian company that owns both VG and
Aftenposten, the country's two biggest papers. The company started 150 years
ago with Aftenposten, containing only ads across four slim pages. Today,
Schibsted is one of Europe's biggest media companies, celebrated by many
media analysts, with many legs to stand on, including paidfor ads on the web.
That business started as a part of Aftenposten, was then set up as a separate
entity (finn.no), and is now copied by Schibsted with considerable success
many countries throughout Europe.
How can we develop quality journalism? We still have the material resources
and probably make better papers than ever, in terms of professionalized,
independent journalism. Of course there are many exceptions and we don't
deliver consistently good journalism every day.
In some ways it is easier to sell quality than ever before, not least, as I already
hinted, because readers tend to be more sophisticated and educated and want
journalism that makes them better citizens and persons.
Quality journalism means: insight; knowledge and understanding of a complex
reality; analyses and qualified opinions; welltold narratives and personal
journalism from the best writers of the day; surprises. It also means being
selective in a world characterized by immense information overload.
Newspapers need to choose some of the best material available but also point
to other material, combining the best of traditional and new media. Moderation
remains necessary, even if it is the rationalism of a moderating collective.
An article from www.eurozine.com

2/3

In short, we need to offer more of the same and more of the best. And
something new, too. Let me just mention some of our innovative spinoff
products that show Aftenposten's way of thinking:
We publish the magazine monthly Insight. Started just for fun, it now runs 30
000 copies a month and is turning a profit. It contains reprints from the paper
and more from freelancers both in Norway and abroad. And in April 2011 we
launched a new cultural magazine, K, based on the same editorial model.
It's amazing, isn't it? New printed products! With a market! And with instant
success!
But there are even more demands to be met in the way we plan our journalism.
We have to strengthen integrated editorial thinking. It isn't easy for papers that
were originally printbased to see other platforms as equally prestigious, but
that is what we must do. We need think of and present journalism in different
ways according to the platform, be it paper, web or smart phone. We need to
continuously allow readers influence our journalism and recruit new readers
through social media.
The "death of the book" has been greatly exaggerated. The same could be said
about the "big media" and print newspapers. They will be around for a long
time, depending on each company's ability to transform. Noninnovative
media, whether big or small, will disappear while specialized niche media will
have to become even better in their niches. And what about innovative, big,
mainstream media? As I said: they are likely to face a very tough, strenuous
future. Yet it will also be a bright future, given their fundamental will and
ability to innovate, both in print and on other platforms.

Published 20110701
Original in English
First published in Eurozine
Knut Olav ms
Eurozine

An article from www.eurozine.com

3/3