Newspapers are still the main interest of these organizations, but they are afraid that at any moment they could become extinct
The group which publishes “The New York Times” announced a loss of $648 million in the last quarter of 2006. A survey done by the consulting company Challenger Gray & Christmas, cited by EFE news agency, revealed that last year in the United States, 17,809 jobs in news organizations were eliminated, almost 90% more than occurred in 2005 (9,453).
The reasons most frequently mentioned for the problems of U.S. dailies could be summarized in two points: the difficulty earning money on the Internet and the uninterrupted decline in earnings from advertising. The drop in circulation should increase.
Newspapers, not just in the United States, are going through a time of suspense. They are still the main interest of their companies, but they are afraid that at any moment they may have no future and become an extinct species that could be replaced by the new stars in the business. Stars that already shine, such as the Internet, but with which newspapers are still far from making money.
One of the results of this situation is the constant cuts in investments for quality. They invest in maintenance, in the indispensable conditions to extend the survival of newspapers, but they rarely make long-term investments.
Newsrooms are smaller and younger, with fewer resources and lower budgets.
The reduced network
One of the consequences of the crisis in the press in the United States is a reduction of correspondents outside of their headquarters cities. Many newspapers have already made cuts inside the United States, even including Washington, the political center of the country.
In recent times, the cuts reached the network of foreign correspondents, one of the triumphs of the press in the United States.
According to a survey in “The Christian Science Monitor,” newspapers in the United States in 2000 had 282 foreign correspondents. After Sept. 11, 2001, this number reached 304 journalists. At the end of 2006, the number fell to 249. And last week, with new cuts announced by “The Boston Globe,” a newspaper that belongs to “The New York Times,” the network was reduced to 239 correspondents, a 21 0rop compared with 2001.
The number is still impressive when compared to the rest of the international press, with few exceptions. But it is an indicator of a loss in quality.
In Brazil
The situation in Brazil is even worse, although the business indicators in 2006 were positive. The Circulation Verification Institute (IVC) showed 6.3 0rowth in newspaper circulation.
That number was boosted by the recovery of so-called popular newspapers, for sale on news stands at a lower price, which experienced approximately 15 0rowth.
The large newspaper segment, to which Folha belongs, was practically stagnant, with average growth of 0.3ompared with the same period in 2005.
I don’t have the final advertising numbers. But in September, the Inter-Media Project of the magazine “Media & Message” pointed out an accumulated growth of 11.45 0uring the year in relation to the same period in 2005.
Newspapers, with a 15.9hare of the publicity pie (TV, with Globo in front, had 56.2%) showed 6 0rowth compared with 2005.
These are not, however, disastrous numbers. Still, newspapers seem to continue having difficulties crossing the desert, a term used at Folha to refer to the long period of crisis that started in 2004.
Brazilian newspapers also had big networks of correspondents in other countries, not the size of “The New York times,” or “El Pas” of Spain. But they managed to form their own structures to capture information that showed a willingness to produce original journalism with a Brazilian focus.
Folha, for example, in 1991 had a network of 22 journalists, 13 of them correspondents, three stringers and nine regular contributors. The newspaper, which had an average daily circulation of 388,000 copies, had a presence at the time in six cities in the United States, 10 cities in Europe, plus Tokyo, Santiago and Buenos Aires.
Times have changed, with circulation now at 309,000 and a different level of resources.
The newspaper today has a correspondent in Washington, stringers in Buenos Aires, New York and London and occasional contributors in a few other countries. The situation is worse at “O Estado de So Paulo” (Buenos Aires, Geneva, Washington, London and Paris) and at the Rio daily “O Globo” (Washington, New York, Buenos Aires, Paris, London and Beijing).
But nothing is more shocking that the cuts made in the network of domestic correspondents. The state of Alagoas has been experiencing an uninterrupted crisis since Jan. 1, with budget cuts, strikes, occupations of public buildings and indignation about increases in benefits public officials gave themselves.
It is sad to realize that a big part of the news is produced in So Paulo by telephone.
PERSONAL STORY
“Nothing replaces the view of the correspondent”
I was alerted about the reduction in the network of correspondents at newspapers in the United States by Srgio Dvila, Folha’s correspondent in Washington. He already held the same position in New York (2000-2003) and California (2004-2005). Here is his account: “Leaving Brazil, in March 2000 for my first foreign posting as Folha’s correspondent in New York, the Internet bubble had just burst and discussions at U.S. news organizations were where and how to make cuts. They rounded up ‘the usual suspects’: overseas bureaus. They went through the Sept. 11 attacks, and newspapers such as ‘The New York Times’ and ‘Wall Street Journal’ (which had closed almost its bureaus in the Middle East) were caught with their pants down.
“When photographer Juca Varella and I left Brazil, the weekend before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, there were about 2,000 journalists from around the world in Baghdad. When we arrived, in the early morning hours before the first bombing, there were less than 200. That is the total number of foreign correspondents in the press published in the United States spread out around the world today. And after the attack and invasion, the honeymoon ended and the crisis returned.
“From these cuts, an eloquent number became public: maintaining a ‘The New York Times’ office in Baghdad for one year costs the same as what ‘People’ magazine paid for pictures of the baby of actors Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, $4 million. In a certain way, the comparison summarizes the discussion about where journalism in the United States is headed – which road do we take? The one involving celebrities gets a bigger audience, but personal coverage of big events around the world is one of the fundamental roles of the press. Here is just one comment: celebrities will always give birth, but nothing can replace view of a correspondent on the scene.”
Translation by John Wright
