The business model for newspapers, we are told, is collapsing. Newspaper companies across the world are under siege from investors and bankers because their advertising revenues are in free fall due to an enveloping recession, and because their monopoly on classified advertising has been hijacked by the internet.
Right now, most big newspaper publishers are acting like stunned rabbits in the headlights. Their immediate solution to this tsunami has been visceral: cut costs, try to sell assets, cut more costs, slice dividends, defer debt repayments, cut more costs. And, after all that, pray that the spiral will end soon.
But in the minds of some people who understand and care deeply about the future funding source of good journalism, a more nuanced and thoughtful response to the demise of the 150-year-old broadsheet newspaper business model is emerging — the idea of reinventing so-called “broadsheet” newspapers as high quality niche products targeted at narrower audiences who are attractive to advertisers and fundamentally committed to the idea of reading a newspaper. With smaller circulations and higher cover prices. Operating on a much lower revenue base, with far less dependence on classified advertising.
In Australia, and specifically at Fairfax Media, this approach would clearly require a new management and editorial mindset to create an entirely different kind of quality newspaper.
A leaner, bespoke newspaper that bristled with ideas and curiosity because it no longer had the requirement to appeal to a broad market. A newspaper that treated news as the commodity it now is and built on the news with backgrounding, probing and analysis. A newspaper with fewer pages, vastly less lifestyle and advertorial journalism and much more certainty about its place in the life of its (smaller) audience. A newspaper that connected with the issues that mattered to its more defined universe of readers. Emphatically not an elite newspaper, but an intelligent newspaper. A newspaper that no longer had to deploy costly tricks and subterfuge to manufacture an audited circulation because it had the confidence to believe in its value to advertisers.
And — crucially for the business model — a newspaper with half the staff and cost base of today’s Sydney Morning Herald or Age. Fewer journalists (but still the best journalists), fewer executives on high salaries, an entrepreneurial energy and structure, a vibrant editorially-led culture with no wrap-arounds or football posters or form guides or fashion supplements or wine magazines or expensive sponsorships. A sleek pocket battleship, not a rusting Queen Mary.
Is this a viable model for the future of quality newspapers? Many people with expertise are talking about it and believe it could be a confident response in an eerily unconfident industry. Are the current owners and management of imperilled newspapers capable of conceptualising such a template? Unlikely.
This kind of newspaper model would actually be a new invention hooked on to an existing prestige masthead — not a beaten and battered, trimmed-down, low-cost version of an existing newspaper. Which is why the incumbents are probably the people least likely to understand it or embrace it.

I would just add:
The need for integrity, which has been missing from the main media for far too long.
Total independence from corporate and political influence and spin.
Inteligent and well informed contributors who can also write well.
The book “The Innovator’s Dilemma” by Clayton M. Christensen, HBS Press 1997, explained through case studies as different as backhoes and computer disk drives how leading companies fail to adapt to disruptive [technological] changes. Newspaper, and other media companies, are failing for the same reasons. Unless they have very enlightened management who are able to lead their staff, companies and customers (readers) through these changes, the end is inevitable. The public manifestation of Fairfax management’s decisions does not exhibit any signs that they are aware of the lessons written about by Christensen, and are so doomed to continuing leading their company and staff into the sorry end. When will they learn???
I’m under 30 and really enjoy reading a good newspaper with a range of interesting supplements on a Saturday or Sunday morning. Unfortunately I normally live in WA and acquiring a good newspaper is impossible, especially on a Sunday. At the moment I am in the UK, and yes UK newspapers are seeing their circulation numbers drop, but the quality of journalism and the range of stories is just so much better (in the newspaper I regularly read anyway) than what I can get in Australia. I think the problem with Australia, is there is a small number of papers who are trying to appeal to everyone, rather than having a target market. In the UK, papers know who they appeal to and stick with their target audience. Just think about the range of different audience types that each paper is trying to target: The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Times, The Guardian etc, each one relatively distinct. In WA however, we have 1 paper trying to appeal to both the highest and lowest denominator and fails on both accounts. Its going to be hard when I do get back home, what am I going to read on my leisurely weekend mornings?
Quality newspaper, we’re talking dead-tree type? I’d be interested, if it were weekly or monthly. Which is pointing to a form-factor more like the Bulletin was. For daily news there’s online.
Memo to online news services: don’t bother with ads, we block them with firefox and or our hosts file.
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
Kevin Jones beat me to it.
I was going to add that this newspaper of the future sounds a lot like a magazine.
Personally I love the idea of a mix of niche advertising and paying for content.
My eyeballs are tired of being sold.