When he bought The Inquirer some years ago, Brian Tierney did a very smart thing: He acknowledged that he didn't know anything about running a newspaper. So he decided to consult with those he figured knew more than he did. Another good idea. Unfortunately, he consulted with the usual suspects, who persuaded him that the way forward was the way back. That didn't turn out so well. He might want to spend some time reading the online versions of the Guardian, the Telegraph, and the Wall Street Journal.
When I was book editor, I once emailed him that I had noticed that Starbucks stocked the New York Times, but not The Inquirer. He wrote back that he knew that and was taking steps to see that it changed. I'm sure he did and as far as I know Starbucks now has The Inquirer on hand (I can't say for sure because I don't go to Starbucks very often. Anyway, mere access isn't enough. It is the quality of the product that counts. Bad though the Times has become, it still offers more than The Inquirer usually does. It would be very easy, and not at all expensive, for The Inquirer to have a book section that was fully competitive withe the Times's. They could probably even sell it to other papers around the country. Throw in some serious, imaginative features, and you just might see circulation grow. Don't hold your breath, though.
No comments:
Post a Comment