It boils down to simply being able to do much more and when you harness your resources and figure out that the web is not a static medium, then newspapers and their online counterparts will be better equipped to handle the transition from print to online.
Even the 25 best online newspapers aren’t in any shape to compete with publications that are exclusively online.? Because print newspapers are still trying to fit an old medium into a new one.? Similar to how the earliest television shows were nothing more than people reading radio scripts.
Scott Karp illustrates this with a breakdown of the Washington Post.
It?s like newspapers on the web as saying: here?s all the static stuff we produced for the paper ? you want all of our dynamic web innovation? Oh, that?s downstairs, in the back room. Knock twice before you enter.
It?s a shame ? so much marginalized value.
I bet I could stop going to the New York Times site entirely and just subscribe to all of their blog RSS feeds, and still get all the news, but in a web-native format, with data and LINKS.
Of course, the only way to do that is click on 50 RSS buttons one at a time. And they only publish partial feeds.
And that’s the problem.? Newspapers are still the primary content engine for the web, but they still don’t have people savvy enough to understand exactly what their consumers want and need out of a website.? Once they figure out that things on the web aren’t static, that stories should include video, photo galleries, and a host of other dynamic features they will have caught up to the expectations of their readers.