*** UPDATED BELOW ***
If the Boston Globe is really such an essential component of life in Massachusetts, as John Kerry and his elitist cronies would have us believe, then why aren’t readers rallying to its defense?
Faced with the impending threat of closure by The New York Times Company, the Globies held a rally last week, attracting few beyond its own staff and union hacks with a vested interest in its survival. Missing from the equation, however, are readers- they’ve continued to abandon the paper.
According to newly-released data comparing March 2009 to the same period last year, the Globe has seen print circulation drop by nearly 14%, now down to 302,000 average copies. That’s a decline of roughly 40,000 daily, just since March 2008.
Sure, we’ve all heard the argument that readers have migrated to the Internet and additional data released today indicates visitors are lingering a a few minutes longer at Boston.com. But that actually means little: short-term traffic surges usually depress that figure, while declining visits cause it to rise.
Why? It’s simple: temporary links from other sites, such as Drudge, lead to huge increases for brief periods. As opposed to hard-core daily fans of a site, they read one story and move on elsewhere. That pushes down the average time spent viewing number.
Conversely, during a month where there aren’t many inbound links, only regular readers remain at Boston.com, sending this number back up. At the end of the day, as one-shot tourists disappear, the core readership is most important.
As with radio and television ratings, there’s obviously more to this than a body count: how long someone remains with a program or an article has a significant role in setting ad rates. Next, we’ll look at how this affects Boston talk radio.
UPDATE: the Globies are attempting to spin this news as “at least we weren’t down as much as the Herald”.
But the comparison may not be valid: since the latter paper shut its presses and outsourced production, the number of copies sent to newsstands has been cut sharply, which appears to be intentional. It has become much harder to find a Herald in many shops, especially later in the day. There is a deliberate attempt to sell every delivered paper without leftovers.
Another point: while the Herald is run on a shoestring budget, the Globe has tremendous overhead, yet the latter’s circulation (300,000 vs the Herald’s 150,000) isn’t big enough to make up for those extra costs.
Nonetheless, I do believe it is time for the Herald to consider beefing up its Sunday edition, which is too expensive at $2.00 for what little is provided. Sunday circulation has now fallen under 100,000, underscoring the need for improvement. Either cut the price or add something extra to the paper, before this deteriorates further.


