Numbers in the newsroom and in the audience

Two snips out of Howard Kurtz’s Washington Post column on May 25:

… we are working harder than ever, in part because of the round-the-clock demands of the Web; Post campaign reporters are constantly writing online items for The Trail column in addition to their daily stories. So to suggest that a shrinkage of the Post newsroom from the equivalent of 780 full-time employees to 680 — offset by perhaps 20 new hires — won’t affect the range and quality of what we do is simply unrealistic. (Another 100 work in the newsroom.) And, following a peak of 900 employees, this is the third round of buyouts in five years.

I’m in Vietnam training print journalists for their online future, and at dinner a couple of Saigon Times editors were asking me about workflow and newsroom practices at U.S. newspapers. They know that many of our Web sites are more advanced than theirs (their population is just now starting its big boom in Internet adoption), but they were not aware of the scope of job cuts in North American newsrooms. It’s true that the cuts (at the Post and elsewhere) have been deep and painful. It’s true they have affected what is covered and how well. But 680 newsroom employees … ?

I didn’t take a headcount during my tour of the Saigon Times building earlier today, but I’d be surprised if they have 200 newsroom employees here — and they are producing five publications in two languages.

Daily circulation for the newsprint Post, now 673,000, may be down from 813,000 in 2000, but we are drawing an eye-opening 9.4 million unique visitors online each month, 85 percent of them from outside the D.C. circulation area. Those readers don’t bring in the cash that print subscribers do — given the gotta-be-free mentality of the Web — but they do expand our reach.

This opens a different topic: Is expanding your reach worth anything? Does the Post stand to gain anything from those 8 million non-local visitors?

Looking at my blog stats last night, I noticed that about 68 percent of my visitors came only once ( “Visitor Loyalty” in Google Analytics). That made me feel a little depressed for a few seconds. Then I looked at the numbers for people who visited nine or more times in April. They added up to about 2,000 people. Cool. I felt rather pleased.

I’m not sure there’s a way to tie these two numbers together — newsroom staff levels and content reach — but I would venture to say that one might be higher than necessary, and the other needs further analysis before it becomes useful.

4 Comments on “Numbers in the newsroom and in the audience

  1. Re: cuts – how much quicker does technology allow journalists to work? Surely much, much quicker.

    Re: reach – is an advertising value and all the value in the chain is still with Google which controls the route to the page being viewed.

  2. I’d say reaching those 8 million people beyond your print reach is valuable. Beyond drawing national advertisers, you’re building a brand. Those far-flung audience members rely on your publication to be the first, most reliable account of whatever it is they’re seeking. (In this case, I’m guessing it’s the inside the beltway stories being covered by fewer and fewer local and regional papers.)

    As for your own blog, Mindy, it’s worthy noting that your most loyal readers may only click once or so a month. They might hang on your every word in Google Reader, but unless they feel compelled to post a comment or to read others’ comments, they may never click through to show up in your hit tracker. Judging by your 2,000+ readers in feedburner, I wouldn’t worry about your audience loyalty.

  3. Pingback: The Modern Journalist » Blog Archive » Better Data, Less Information is Key to Young Readers

  4. @Meranda On the other hand, if Mindy were trying to make money off of her blog, those 2000 loyal readers really wouldn’t be generating any direct revenue for her…

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.