I suspect there won't be many multi-daily cities left (save NYC and maybe Chicago) in a few years. Sad, but with TV and radio able to compete on the same level - higher, really, with multimedia - on the web there's just no need for them. Hopefully the journalists latch on to electronic media and do a good job.
The News has been a daily visitor to me and my breakfast since roughly 1987. It had a smaller, readable, format. No way am I switching to the gigantic picnic blanket that is the Denver Post. My subscription stops tomorrow. Sad.
Reading their Twitter (twitter.com) feed from the last two days is kind of a downer (more than once, they comment "it's like covering your own funeral), even though I've never read an edition of the Rocky, or the Denver Post for that matter. More and more now though, I get the impression that I'm in the last generation that will even remember flipping through the paper in the morning at breakfast
Covering their own funeral? Well, they would know a little something about that area. After all, back in September they sent a reporter to Twitter the funeral of a 3 year old boy who was killed in a car collision. Controversial and a big embarassment for the paper. But otherwise, they were the better of the two Denver dailies.
Yet I had to laugh when the freebie rag, The Denver Daily News proclaimed on their front page, on Friday: "We're a 2-daily town"... apparently counting themselves on the same level as the News and the Post. That's like a chubby guy shooting hoops at the YMCA thinking he was snubbed for the NBA All-Star game.
Newspapers have several fits that will help them remain viable: 1. In depth coverage of more regional/local issues of concern. 2. Local sports 3. Local "stuff" in general that is ignored by everyone else. 4.