USAToday Regroups for Cross-Platform World

According to an AP story published in USAToday the Gannett flagship is undertaking a “radical” reorganization to better align its staffing, editorial and sales efforts with the emerging multi-platform audience:

The makeover outlined Thursday will result in about 130 layoffs this fall, USA TODAY Publisher Dave Hunke told The Associated Press. That translates into a 9% reduction in USA Today’s work force of 1,500 employees. Hunke didn’t specify which departments would be hardest hit . . .

The newsroom instead will be broken up into a cluster of “content rings” each headed up by editors who will be appointed later this year . . . “We’ll focus less on print … and more on producing content for all platforms (Web, mobile, iPad and other digital formats),” according to a slide show presented Thursday to USA Today’s staff. The AP obtained copy of the presentation.

Facts from the article about pressure on Gannett and its traditional publications:

• USA TODAY’s circulation has been  . . . dropping to an average of 1.83 million during the six months ending in March. That’s down from 2.3 million in 2007 when USA today reigned as the nation’s largest newspaper. The Wall Street Journal now holds that position with a circulation of 2.09 million.
• Gannett’s stock price has plunged 78% in the past four years, going from about $55 at this time in 2006 to Thursday’s closing price of $12.18.
• Gannett doesn’t break out USA Today’s finances, but the newspaper is by far the largest of the more than 80 dailies the company owns.

The company is also going to focus heavily on mobile distribution going forward. In my view it has done a terrific job with its mobile and iPad apps. And I suspect that a fair number of people would pay for them. Gannett has said that it was going to start charging for its iPad app at some point in the future.

The relationship between print and digital content and how they’re relatively valued is one that is the subject of considerable experimentation and debate right now.

Time, Inc. has apparently decided to make the digital versions of its print pubs free as part of a paid-print bundle. This was previously covered in the NY Times:

The iPad application for People will be free to readers who subscribe to the magazine, the first step toward what Time Inc., the world’s largest magazine publisher, hopes is a model for the bundling of print and digital sales for all its publications.

The question of whether media companies should charge for their digital offerings and risk having fewer people view their content is one of the most urgent issues facing the business today. Other magazine publishers, like Condé Nast, have no plans to give digital content away as part of a print subscription. Condé Nast is devising a pricing structure for print-digital packages, but the prices are expected to exceed current subscription prices.

But Time Inc., which believes strongly that its print subscribers should have access to its digital products without having to pay more, has made the decision to pursue a strategy that favors higher numbers of users over maximizing consumer profits.

This question of how to price the various publications is critical and unresolved. If you were a traditional publisher how would you price things?

• Print-digital bundle for one price
• Print-digital bundle for a premium
• Separate print and digital pricing
• Keep digtal free because that’s the “culture” of digital