\u2018The Independent\u2019 and its sister \u2018The Independent on Sunday\u2019 have announced that they will cease to exist in paper form from later this month. Both will become digital-only titles. The stable\u2019s little sibling \u2018The i\u2019 will be sold to Johnson Press where one imagines it will continue in print form.<\/p>\n
Meantime Trinity Mirror has launched a new title \u2018The New Day\u2019 which will at least initially be a print-only title.<\/p>\n
For those not in the UK, the Independent titles were launched in 1986 (the daily) and 1990 (the Sunday). Both have been in decline with print sales dropping to an estimated 58,000 (daily) and 97,000 (Sunday). The daily at one stage sold around 400,000 copies.<\/p>\n
I bought the first copy of the daily paper, and continued to buy it until 7 or 8 years ago. I haven\u2019t especially missed it (I still buy a printed newspaper every day, just not that one), even though I admire much of the paper\u2019s journalism.<\/p>\n
So what went wrong? Because whatever the brave front of the press releases, the fact is you cannot hide those sales declines.<\/p>\n
The digiterati as always have the answer. A sign of the times; a precursor of what\u2019s to come; an inevitability; no future for print; \u2018The Indie\u2019 will fly online; we were right all along and so on.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m not so sure. Will \u2018The Indie\u2019 fly online? And what of Trinity Mirror\u2019s commitment to print?<\/p>\n
\u2018The Independent\u2019 is certainly free of the cost of having to print copies, and no doubt of many members of staff who will lose their jobs.<\/p>\n
But just being there online isn\u2019t enough. There are many great online news sites, from \u2018The Guardian\u2019 and \u2018The Times\u2019 here to \u2018The New York Times\u2019 and \u2018The Washington Post\u2019 in the USA and a host more in-between. Even if \u2018The Indie\u2019 is equally good why should anyone read it?<\/p>\n
Or indeed advertise in it?<\/p>\n
The thing about the papers I\u2019ve mentioned above, and many others is that they\u2019re great brands that have by definition been built offline. They\u2019re consistent. They have excellent journalists. They have moved to extend their presence via the wonders of online in amongst impressive digital-only competitors whilst maintaining their core brand values.<\/p>\n
\u2018The Independent\u2019 may have some excellent journalists, but is it a great brand? Does it have the foundations on which to build a commanding online presence? Has it built up a degree of consistency? I\u2019m not sure that it has; certainly the many owners, editors and redesigns over its comparatively short life haven\u2019t helped.<\/p>\n
\u2018The Independent\u2019 has certainly run some memorable marketing campaigns.<\/p>\n
The launch line \u2018It is. Are you?\u2019 underpinned one such, but hasn\u2019t been seen for many a year which with hindsight looks like a lost opportunity<\/p>\n
The core thought of editorial independence from any owner (I guess the current owners, the Lebedevs don\u2019t see themselves in that light) could have been extended. Admittedly there was the odd brilliant execution: \u2018Rupert Murdoch Won\u2019t Decide This Election \u2013 You Will\u2019 (an idea that prompted the hilarious threatening visit to the paper\u2019s newsroom in April 2010 by James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks) but such flashes of inspiration were all too rare.<\/p>\n