U.S. newspapers are increasing their use of co-opetition practices, that is, cooperating with competitors to reduce costs, create synergies, or reduce risk in new markets. Such activities are permissible if they are not designed to create cartels or control prices for advertising or circulation.
The latest example occurred this week when the Boston Herald announced an agreement with the Boston Globe for its competitor to print and deliver the Herald. The move creates cost savings for the Herald by allow it to cut printing, trucks, and delivery personnel, while simultaneously creating production and distribution economies and an additional revenue stream for the Globe--a win-win for both companies.
Such service agreements do not violate antitrust laws because the papers remain independent, set their own prices, and create their own content. If papers were to engage in such actions they would have to apply for an antitrust exemption under the Newspaper Preservation Act (see John C. Busterna and Robert G. Picard, Joint Operating Agreements: The Newspaper Preservation Act and its Application. Ablex, 1993), but those agreements have not proven successful in the long run.
The Boston agreement comes on the heels of numerous printing agreements, including that of the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times, that have been made among publishers in the last couple of years.
Another example of co-opetition is seen in the 59 newspaper and information companies—including New York Times Co., McClatchy Co., Washington Post Co., E.W. Scripps Co., A.H. Belo, and Associated Press—that have now banded together to create NewsRight to track use of digital content and ease its licensing. By cooperating with each other, the companies have brought more than 800 content sites into the operation and created a significant player in the digital industry.
Daily newspaper companies have historically disliked cooperation unless it was absolutely necessary—as in the case of news services. The new types of cooperation emerging show that the preference to go it alone is being eroded by contemporary financial conditions and the difficulties of operating independently in the digital environment.
Blog Archive
Popular Posts
-
I was just blown away when I saw the front page of Inside Radio Friday in which they described the results of their special survey on voice...
-
With the NCAA's March Madness annual collegiate basketball frenzy underway, I see too many parallels to the music media business to not ...
-
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case concerning vulgarity on the airwaves -- you know, Bono using the F-word in an unscripted br...
-
By Jerry Del Colliano There is a military term for a situation caused by too many inept officers -- clustering -- referring to the insignia ...
-
It's hard to fathom that a consumer electronic device that is both so cool and so hot may have finally peaked. In my work with college s...
-
The introduction and suspension of media services is becoming a regular occurrence and the combined effects of multiple false starts is crea...
-
All too often lately the major broadcast groups have been firing able and talented people to save money. Last week CBS pulled off a double f...
-
Clear Channel went private yesterday at long last. Thomas H. Lee Partners and Bain Capital Partners are in charge now. They are investment ...
-
The Big Trend: Social Networking Not just Facebook and MySpace. The concept of building a social network around almost anything and having...
-
Well, I guess that settles that. There is no self-censorship in the Fiji news media, according to CFL. At least that’s the conclusion they...