Seattle without a newspaper

NPR affiliate KPLU in Seattle has an article that nicely summarizes the quandary we're seeing in print media.
With the Post-Intelligencer on the brink of extinction, this article talks about the revenue model for the generic newspaper, subsizided heavily via advertising, and the fact it's unsustainable.

It makes the point that the legwork for the stories that matter (in a civic sense, the capital J journalism stuff) is done by reporters, sitting in council meetings, sifting through the back hallway chatter, following facts and sources over time, and bringing to light some story.

It notes that you can't just redirect the resources of the newsroom to the web site, because the web site doesn't make enough money for even 10 percent of the staffers as the legacy (dead tree) product.

Here's a quote from Seattle Times Director of Content Cory Haik on what people seek out online:
"Entertainment: tons of money," she says. "People click on those stories, those display ads are making money. Not so much necessarily for, say, something like the meat and potatoes like local news. People aren't necessarily that interested."

The article makes a point that journalists could do well as bloggers, investigating stories while sharing how the sausage is made during the reporting process, creating a transparent process that engages readers. That transparency and willingness to bring joe public into the action, are crucial ingredients of success.

I always thought news outlets would do well by partnering with local public schools, and I don't just mean giving them free newspapers. By engaging people when they're young, you hook them. You have to get people interested and involved in local politics, state politics, everything. Creating an attentive audience would do more for readership than paying them to read or watch.