Saying goodbye to the wire - Newspapers drop AP subscriptions to cut costs

This article, published on the New York Times website, really caught my attention.

We've heard all the hoopla over the economic woes that newspapers are going through. But other than laying off staff, I haven't heard of many steps that papers were taking in order to survive the financial storm.

Apparently, dropping AP wire services from their publications is the new way to cut back on costs.

This brings one word to mind: desperation.

The Associated Press was created over 100 years ago, and it is the premier news service that shares stories, photographs, and videos with publications all over the world. They have over 13,500 clients.

The annual price for the service is large - the Star Tribune pays over $1 million a year, and the Columbus Dispatch over $800,000 a year. Larger newspapers pay more.

The Columbus Dispatch announced their decision to drop the AP service last week, but contracts can only be broken with a "two-year notice." So, they have a couple years to figure out how they will operate "post-AP."

Some newspapers are banding together to share articles with each other, while others are looking at Reuters or other news outlets to fulfill their news needs.

As I read this, I couldn't quite decide on my position. One one hand, AP service has become expensive, and I do want newspapers to live to see another day... even if they have to scrape by for a little bit while they wait out the storm.

But on the other hand, I truly, honestly believe that a publication couldn't survive as a global paper (maybe a local one, but not a full-service international one) without AP. The AP has writers in over 100 countries, taking pictures and covering stories that some small-town writer from America can't possibly cover.

The Associated Press is, in essence, a newspaper's access to the world. And newspapers are, in theory, the people's access to the world. See the problem?

Yes, I think some alternative news services could be established. But I doubt that any service will come close to the sheer number of reporters and photographers that the AP has on the ground right now.

So, the AP should do something about it. Cut costs. Give newspapers a break. Then maybe, they'll be helping newspapers survive while keeping the public tuned in to world events.

What do you all think? Is there a solution to this?