iPod: The future of newspapers?

April 27th, 2010

There is growing consensus that Apple’s sleek and elegant iPad represents the future of newspapers, magazines and books.

It has been clear for some time that the business model of newspapers in particular has to change, as well as the delivery mechanism. But we should have guessed that the breakthrough would come not from those locked in the traditional formats and industries. After all, it is not record companies which brought the breakthrough for digital music, nor the old landline phone companies which pioneered new cellphone technologies. They have too many legacy habits and outdated ways of thinking to take these conceptual leaps.

In many cases, the great industry-changing leaps forward came from one company and one person: Steve Jobs of Apple. His mind is now on e-publishing. He has made it clear he cares about newspapers, and recognizes their unique social and political role. Besides, it may just be this content which makes his iPad fly. Apple, you should note, is headed to overtake Microsoft in market capitalization.

The iPad is the first time we have seen a way for print products like newspapers and magazines to be delivered electronically with glorious colour, ease of reading, long battery life and portability. It follows from Amazon’s Kindle, Barnes and Nobles’ Nook, Sony’s e-book and other versions. I am a Kindle-user and love the flexibility, cheapness and ease of reading it offers.

But, as is often the case with Apple and Jobs, the iPad is bolder, better to handle and way, way cooler. He is a genius of design of both hard and software. Everyone who holds it is awed. It is – to use the cliché of technomania – a game-changer.

Hold any of these e-reading devices and you immediately realize that it has to be the way forward for books, magazines and newspapers. This is not to say the paper versions will disappear, at least in the near future, but one can’t avoid the fact that it makes overwhelming sense. Gone are the massive print and distribution costs of print. What it gives us instead is instant, cheap delivery; masses more choice of content; and the possibility of much more rich, interactive, multimedia. The one advantage newspapers had was portability, and now we have it in a readable electronic device.

The change is unstoppable.

Newspaper mogul Rupert Murdoch has called the iPad “a glimpse of the future”. Two of his keenest rivals in the fight over the future of journalism, Alan Rusbridger of the Guardian in London, and the New York Times publishers, also acknowledge the breakthrough. Rusbridger called it “a transformative interim step”, which I think is a grudging way of saying it is a great leap forward, but not yet quite at the point where newspapers work properly on the device.

Certainly, these are still early days and the iPod and its rivals will still have to fight it out for market dominance and workable, desirable features. And the prices will have to come down to penetrate markets such as ours. But, mark this moment, newspapers and magazines will not be the same again.

The iPad does not solve the problem of a business model in an era when advertising is no longer able to sustain journalism as we have known it, but it does point the way forward. There is potential for effective advertising on it, in a way we haven’t seen with phones and most news websites. It reduces costs, but it does not change the fundamental cost of journalism, which is about 60% of newspaper costs. We are still going to have to learn to pay more for content, but I, for one, am happy to pay for more choice, quicker delivery, and a lessening of the influence of advertisers over our news content. And, of course, to save trees.

There is another obvious use staring us all in the face, probably for the Kindle rather than the iPad. This is the natural way to solve the school textbook problems that plague our schools. The Kindle can hold hundreds of books for the price of just a few, updated at any time, have long battery lives for those who have limited access to electricity, and they are light, mobile and easy-to-read.
It is a no-brainer.

Someone tell the Department of Education.

*This column first appeared in Business Day, April 14, 2010

Entry Filed under: Anton Harber, Journalism, Online, Print