"The Times was always bigger, but the two were somewhat comparable. These days, that's far from reality. The Post has been declining in influence, newsroom staff and financial health losing at least $100m a year while the Times is on an astonishing upward trajectory, with operating profit approaching $200m annually. The Times boasts about 13 million digital subscribers compared to the Post's roughly 2 million."
"So, I've seen it all unfold before my eyes. The difference certainly wasn't about journalistic talent. For decades, both newsrooms have been stuffed to the brim with it, winning Pulitzer Prizes aplenty and hiring great reporters and editors. No, it all came down to leadership. At the Times, a publicly traded company, leadership has been steady, predictable and savvy always with an eye to the future."
The New York Times vastly outperformed the Washington Post in subscribers, profits, and global newsroom size, while the Post suffered declining influence, staff, and financial losses. The Times reached about 13 million digital subscribers, operating profit near $200 million, and over 2,000 newsroom staff worldwide. The Post fell to roughly 2 million digital subscribers, about 400 newsroom staff, and estimated annual losses of at least $100 million. Consumer-related revenue, especially online subscriptions, became dominant over print advertising. Leadership differences drove divergent trajectories, with the Times embracing steady, future-focused management and a radical digital transition.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]