The Scotsman is dying. So is The Herald. Here are some notes towards a plan to save them – and all newspapers. I’d like to see a consortium to put this into practice and save Scotland’s native, quality, national press for the nation. This isn’t born out of delusion but rather a few discussions I’ve had with like-minded senior journalists who believe that the money can be raised and that this is last chance to save these two titles.

A merger of sorts

Nobody likes this option but nearly everyone agrees it’s the way forward. In its most commonly described form, this is not the solution, however, merely a way of buying a little time for both publications. As things currently stand, if one title took over the other it would pick up so few readers and advertisers as to render the exercise pointless.

However, there is a cleverer way: merge the businesses but keep the titles largely separate. This would involve cutting costs by streamlining the “backroom” functions of both organisations: sales, IT, printing, etc.

Scotland has in it enough talented journalists to make one world-class newsroom strong enough to send the tartanised English editions hameward to think again. With this in mind, some parts of the papers themselves could be “merged” in the sense that the same content for these sections would appear in both papers. The aim here would not be to cut costs but to increase quality. While The Herald and Scotsman have distinct voices when it comes to Scottish news, politics, business, opinion and maybe sport but UK news, foreign news, TV listings and features could be shared between them, if it meant the coverage of these areas was better.

However, this will only work if the economic model behind the papers changes.

A matter of trust

There is no point in someone buying The Scotsman and/or Herald and trying to run them at Johnston Press/Gannett profit levels. The days of screwing 20-35% profit margins out of papers are dead for ever.

Similarly, there is not much point in the papers being bought by a billionaire with an agenda. The Scotsman has already been through that with the Barclays and Andrew Neil. What is required is a set-up that guarantees editorial independence, sustainable returns and reinvestment for the long-term health of the business. This means a trust, along the lines of the ones that own the Irish Times and The Guardian.

Web first

The first thing both papers need to sort out is the online dimension. The Herald site has always been an embarrassment (though it’s classifieds brands, especially S1jobs, are strong). And  scotsman.com was a tremendous property until Johnston Press got involved.

There is still a lot of potential for substantial online revenue, if the sites are managed correctly. Despite the best efforts of JP, scotsman.com is still visited by some two million unique users a month, the Herald by 500,000.

Design: Obviously the sites need to look and work a whole lot better. They should be tag-based sites that offer related articles (naturally), rating, sharing, “most read”, “latest comments”, trackbacks and basically all the functionality we associate with Wordpress and other blogging software.

Archives: Every single article possible from the past should be published online. This will drive online revenue from existing editorial assets.

Online first: Stories should be published online first. We want to avoid telling people things that they’ve already known for 18 hours. Reader reaction can then inform what appears in print the next day and help move stories forward. A lot of effort should be put into online only features which drive content to older material. Lists, guides and galleries are wonderful tools for doing this.

Comment: In one year, scotsman.com received 700,000 reader comments, the vast majority of which added a great deal to the value of the site – and its revenue. Comment is a vital tool for any serious online publisher. What scotsman.com lacked and what the Herald’s 9-5 moderators fail to provide is proper moderation. A system will need to be devised to encourage lively debate but keep the “green inkies” at bay.

User generated content: The best way to get people to buy a paper is to put their names in it. And the best way to make them feel valued and involved is to tell their stories. This is not some web2-fanboy suggestion for a reader-written paper. (The skills of writing grammatically, spelling properly, identifying interesting information and presenting it clearly are restricted to a tiny proportion of the population – and not enough journalists.) It is a recognition that we need to get closer to the readers by using their words and pictures. We experimented with this at scotsman.com and it worked very well.

Learn from traffic: scotsman.com was one of Google News’s top 30 sites worldwide. We acheived this by seeing what worked and doing more of it. I’m not suggesting that the Scottish papers of the future should only write stories about sex and kittens but they should take a more analytical approach to what they commission.

Getting clever about online revenue

Many of the new models for journalism being touted (for instance, by Jeff Jarvis) don’t take into account the fact that professional journalists actually want to make a living.

The reason for this is that there is a key problem for online content. For a site to be successful it needs to have unique content, quality content, lots of content and content that does not cost more than the revenue it generates. This is an impossible square to circle. However, The Scotsman and Herald have opportunities to round off the edges a bit.

Get the basics right: First of all, they should be able to properly monetise their existing properties. Certainly, scotsman.com has not been backed up by a sophisticated online advertising team.

Maximise sponsorship: The beauty of a tag-based site is that every keyword becomes a sponsorship opportunity, with the option for each tag’s landing page to be associated with an advertiser. Other properties, such as RSS feeds and email newsletters, are rich sources of ad revenue.

US market: At its height, scotsman.com was attracting 4 million unique users a month (ABCe audited figures). Unsurprisingly, most of that traffic did not come from Scotland but the vast majority of advertising effort went into UK advertising.  A concerted attempt to reach the more lucrative US market with imaginative products should yield very healthy ad revenue.

Hyperlocal ads: Closer to home, not enough effort has been made to make cheap adverts work for small businesses online. There needs to be a realisation that “no ad is too small”.

Reinventing print

Print will never die: The internet does not mean the death of print. It does not mean the death of newspapers. What it means is a reinvention of how print fits into the economic model. Aside from its permanence and intrinsic romance, there will always be a demand for a print product of some kind. Print has advantages over new media in some areas, especially when it comes to consuming longer articles and complex information. However, some things need to change.

More meat, less filler: I heartily recommend Drew Curtis’s “It’s not news, it’s Fark – how mainstream media tries to pass crap off as news” as an exercise in learning what’s wrong with our industry. The days of recycling PA and agency copy to fill space are dead. News agencies big and small frequently post their news stories online so those stories are “out there” hours before their retreaded versions appear on the newspaper stands.

Digests, depth and your paper:

The newspaper of the (very near) future will offer summaries of the stories that people can find elsewhere. It will serve as a resource to point readers towards interesting nuggets in the vast landslide of information they are faced with.

The paper should then offer in-depth coverage of its own exclusives (remember them?) and a couple of major issues of the day. By in-depth, I mean lavish, luscious coverage designed to inform, entertain and amaze – outdoing the tartan editions of the London press.

In terms of sales, the Scottish press needs to learn from the Metro. Cheap news that has been regurgitated from PA is judged to have no value by the market. It is given away free. It is therefore no longer reasonable to ask people to pay for products filled with this kind of material.

However, valuable lessons can be learned from the Metro phenomenon. There is a place for free print products. But these should be thought of mainly as a promotional tool for the main revenue generators: the website and the main printed product.

A key lesson of the collapse in newspaper sales is that tens of thousands of people are no longer willing to spend about a £1 a day for news.

However, I believe there is a market for print as a prestige purchase. Readers like to identify themselves as Scotsman or Herald readers – despite the decline in quality of these titles. There is value here – if a product can be created that feels like it is in the premium bracket. Thanks to advances if print technology papers can now offer personalised editions. Rather than have to buy the “shotgun” mix of stories and sections, readers can be given “their” version of the paper. In my case that would be all the news sections, sport and opinion. (I have no need of re-Heated celeb features.) If that paper was delivered to my home I would be prepared to pay extra for it.

Such personalisation would be carried out online at the moment that the user subscribed to the paper. It is important to note that, despite the stubbornness of UK papers, home delivery is the only way to lock in readers. We have to lower the barriers to them buying the product and that means making it as convenient as possible.

Conclusion

So there’s my plan. Chuck rocks at it. Mock it. But remember that no matter how far-fetched or unreasonable it seems it still makes far more sense than trying to save your business by making the product weaker.

PR: wait… I: wait… L: wait… LD: wait… I: wait… wait… C: wait… SD: wait…

Come on, people. We have Manuel. We have a man with beard. This is basic stuff.

Further, the transcripts are useless as the “offensive” elements are starred out. We are told that Ross shouted to Sachs’s answerphone: “He ****** your granddaughter!” or, if the media outlet’s being daring: “f*****”. 

But if we’re going to get properly outraged we need to know what the overpaid choob actually said because that affects how serious the whole row is. Was it “shagged”? Because that’s no biggie. With the “f*****” version we know it was probably “fucked”? But maybe it was “fisted” or even “felched” both of which bring different layers of seriousness to the party.

God bless the Grauniad that at least dared tell its readers what they should be offended about. And I’d bless the Beeb for doing the same but I know they’ll hang a functionary out to dry and give the alleged stars the mildest of slaps on the wrist.

I was sent a link to this Guardian Unlimited blog by a 19-year-old called Max who’s off on a trustafarianesque jaunt to India and Thailand. I won’t pass comment on the quality of the lad’s writing because the poor boy has been given a highly entertaining kicking by GU readers. Here’s just some of the very very negative responses.

Reallynay: Nil interest. Full stop.

teganjovanka: Bring back national service.

DaveWinters: Instead of setting off on yet another inane, identikit trip around Asia before you take up your place at Oxbridge (or wherever), why don’t you leave your family’s Highgate mansion FOR GOOD, cut yourself off from your father’s allowance, move into a council estate in Salford, STAY THERE, and then consider writing a blog about your experiences. Why does our society only grant a voice to those with nothing to say?

Calleprofunda: This has to be by far the least interesting thing I’ve ever stumbled across on this website. I mean, really? I’m sure Max is ‘an-alright-kinda-guy’ and he will have fun on his holiday (yes ‘holiday’, it’s funny how by labelling it ‘travelling’, people somehow attach some sort of profundity to their couple of months lounging and partying in the sun). He’ll make a few new friends, see some beautiful sights/ landscapes, take some fun drugs etc etc…exhilirating stuff. Seriously, is this guy’s holiday really worthy of a blog advertised on the main page of the website? Have you nothing better to put on your website. Shame on you guardian.co.uk

Realsocialdad: who, in God’s name, thought this would be a good idea?

Lameplanet: He looks like a cliche, talks like a cliche, and is about to embark on a monumental cliche.

IvorMarlow: I noticed a problem with the site: under every post there’s this: “Offensive? Unsuitable?” Then a report button. Except on the top one. You know, Max’s post.

Benulek: Oh Christ, this guy’s going to get an absolute hammering. [Guardian Unlimited] commissioning editors, you are cruel, cruel beasts. I almost feel sympathetic. Almost. Don’t forget, poverty is sad, but kinda authentic and like ennobling, mmmhmmm. Why does nobody go looking for themselves in Belarus?

Luwinta: Please take it down. It’s not fair.

Things really start to hot up when people notice that the 19-year-old wannabe wordsmith, one Max Gogarty, shares a surname with a journalist who had written for the Guardian on travel.

Cevicheater: …and who on the Guardian is he related to?

Madame: Well, given that Paul Gogarty is a travel writer for the Guardian, I guess that answers the question about who he’s related to …

Aikers: It seems there is a Paul Gogarty who already writes for the Guardian Travel section. Coincidence? I think not.I like the Guardian usually, but sometimes, they don’t half get it wrong. Moneyed youngster goes travelling to the usual places to get drunk and meet girls? Well, bugger me, a stroke of genius.

MacDonald: This is excellent stuff. Normally the Guardian, along with our other fine press establishments, manage to hide from their readers the fact that journalism is one of the most neoptistic industries in the country. The ‘work experience’ to children and friends’ children; the unpaid work you have to do to get in – - but now, true to its politics, the Guardie has blown the lid on all of that. Hats off to them, that’s what I say. May this be the start of great transparency – I suggest a weekly list of whose kids are benefitting from the paper’s largesse at that moment.

Somewhat unsportingly, one reader compared a quote from Max’s post to an article his father had written about taking him to Thailand half a decade ago:

Sonofagun: “every one I’ve spoken to is making no secret of the fact that Thailand should be pretty damn decadent.” Max, you were only in Thailand five years ago when your father wrote an article about your trip for this very newspaper. Cast your mind back to that holiday. That’s what Thailand will be like. The link is here, in case you’ve forgotten: http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2002/apr/06/bangkok.thailand.familyholidays

But fair play to the Graun, they’ve left a large number of the posts up there. And there’s even this post:

Hello everyone, I’m the editor of the site. Thanks for all your comments. Just to clear up a couple of points. Yes, well spotted, Max is the son of Paul Gogarty, who has written a few travel pieces for the Guardian over the years, though he isn’t a Guardian employee. Max got in touch with us because he writes occasionally for the TV programme Skins. He wants to write an honest account of what teenagers get up to on their travels, and we hope you might be able to give him tips about what to see and do when he’s in Thailand and India – how to make the most of it, what to avoid… Plus, if you’ve seen other travel blogs you’d like to recommend, do send links for us to add. Some of you have mentioned that you’d like to be given the chance to write about your travels. We’re always looking for good writers, so feel free to drop us a line at travel@guardian.co.uk.

Afterthought: It occurred to me during the long watches of the night that this sums up the dilemma of online publishers. Traffic is governed by the iron rule of the power law distribution. Because of the famed long tail associated with this content sites need to have as many bits of content on them as possible to A) serve niches and B) increase traffic. The long tail means that every piece of content has its place, that it will be of interest to somebody. The secret to high traffic is to have enough of these items to appeal to as many niches as possible. Someone, somewhere will be interested in Max’s holiday (even if it’s just his dad and chums) so the GU is serving a niche in a way. But at the same time it’s pissing off its core readership. Aye, there’s the rub.