Saying Good-bye to a Newspaper

For years, I faithfully subscribed to the Wall Street Journal. I liked the business focus. The in-depth reporting. The regular off-the-beaten-track feature stories.

I even liked the launch of the Personal Journal section a couple years back, which had more lifestyle reportage (including wine reviews, which I always enjoyed).

But this week marks the end of my customer journey with the WSJ. And it has nothing to do with the paper vs. digital transition.

Reason #1: The paper has changed. Too much. It’s been, for lack of a better term, “Murdoch-ized.” The last straw was the NY section, with all kinds of style and fashion garbage. I found that when the WSJ was in my hands, it no longer felt like a “serious” news vehicle the way it once did. The fluff invasion got to me.

Reason #2: They never could crack the nut of getting reliable, on-time delivery to my door. Whoever was in charge of morning delivery by car was so unreliable (multiple reports of poor service made no difference) that I finally insisted on getting the paper by U.S. Mail. This meant getting the paper in late afternoon – an OK compromise – but then, starting a couple months ago, suddenly daily issues began not showing up at all, or coming one or two days late. Making contact via Twitter, phone, and e-mail actually yielded personal interactions, but the bottom line is: the problem wasn’t fixed.

Delivering something on-time and on-target 70-80% of the time just doesn’t cut it.

And so, good-bye to an old friend. I still respect you. I appreciate the memories. And I”ll stay in touch on-line.

But you didn’t deliver.


Subscribe to the Connection Agent blog via Reader (RSS) | via e-mail

Twitter: @ConnectionAgent | @swoodruff

Connect with Steve Woodruff

About Steve Woodruff
Steve Woodruff is a blogger, a Connection Agent, and a consultant in the pharma/healthcare industry. He specializes in helping people and companies make mutually beneficial connections.

3 Responses to Saying Good-bye to a Newspaper

  1. Karen Swim says:

    Steve, sadly WSJ is only one example of the changes you cited. It seems that reality TV has replaced smart, scripted shows and stories about Lindsey Lohan’s fingernail polish have replaced hard news. Journalists no longer have the luxury of writing in depth, serious stories as an industry that saw the future and ignored it struggles to define who they will be when they grow up in this new age. Perhaps one day when we have tired of fluff and free, there will be a glorious resurgence of real news.

  2. Brett Duncan says:

    This is sad. WSJ should be the one paper that can say “Go on down the track of fluffy puff pieces, newspaper industry. We’re the Wall Street Journal, and we’ll be the only paper that KEEPS delivering REAL news.

    To add on to Karen’s point, in this age of evolving idiocracy, the good news is that the real thing actually has more elbow room than ever before. The good stuff can stand out, as long as they don’t sell out.

    Sounds like WSJ sold out.


%d bloggers like this: