DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.
User-uploaded Content
DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.
User-uploaded Content
DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.
User-uploaded Content
DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.

Jacqueline Villagomez

April 27, 2013

WRD 104


Go Fast, Go Green, Go Digital


Over the decades, America has become a society based on technology. Depending on how you see it, this can be both a good and bad thing. With the creation of computers, smartphones, and tablets, we have the capacity of retrieving information in seconds. Why not take full advantage of why this wonderful phenomenon? THe New York Times (NYT) should be read digitally because it is time efficient, environmentally friendly, and in the end is much cheaper.


When advertising their internet service, most companies claim that they are the fastest. Why would they do such a thing? Today’s market whether it is internet service or a wireless service, focuses on speed. In the fast-paced American lifestyle, speed is everything. Speed is what the market demands and speed is what the market will get.


How then can we tie reading to the NYT to speed? Shortly after Apple’s infamous Ipad, was released, The NYT launched an app that allows you to read the paper digitally. Thanks to this app, you can read the news as soon as it’s out. The time when waiting till moon for your morning delivery is over. Have your news at the palm of your hands the moment it’s published.


Like any good citizen, we all know that Americans have the tendency to over-consume. Whether it is fast food or paper, we have a tendency to push our limits. As concern grows for environmental issues, reading the NYT digitally is a great way to “Go Green” It is environmentally friendly because we waste no paper, and even saves natural gas from transporting your paper from the printing press to your doorstep. Resources such as paper, ink, and natural gas makes the outcome of reading the NYT digitally far superior than the consequences of reading in print.   

 

The New York Times uses a ridiculously large amount of paper each year. According to their 2012 year-end financial statements, they estimated a consumption of 39,420 metric tons of paper from their Malbaie paper plant alone and another 5,640 metric tons from Madison Paper Industries. Even after using this enormous amount of paper, the NYT still uses raw material from other sources. In 2012, they used approximately 174,000 metric tons of newsprint raw materials and 17,700 metric tons of coated supercalendered paper. Looking at the numbers, one would say that using so much paper is an environmental sin.


After seeing that reading the NYT is beneficial digitally because of its speed and “greenness,” there is also an online subscription that costs $3.75 on your smartphone and $5 on your tablet each week. A subscription to the Sunday newspaper alone to be shipped to your door costs about $4. It would be cost beneficial to both the consumer and the NYT because the consumer will have unlimited access to all of the NYT journals for a lower cost and the NYT will save on transportation costs, printing costs, and labor costs.


According to their 2012 Annual Report, the NYT generated approximately $1,990,080 in revenues. Their operating costs on the other hand were $1,830,399, thus having a net profit of $159, 689. Comparing these numbers to their 2011 year-end report, having $1,952,630 in revenue, their revenue actually increased. This was caused by online subscriptions that have been available through smartphones and tablets. While not everyone in the world is privileged enough to own a fancy device, there are plenty of resources such as libraries and schools to gain access to the NYT digitally.


Although the NYT did better in 2012 than they did in 2011, they still face a great number of risks. Their former competitor, the Tribune company, went into bankruptcy. Their operating revenues from their last 10k showed only $3,111,317 in revenue. Their operating costs which summed up to be $2,741,701 left little profit which caused it go into bankruptcy. By reducing the amount of newspapers printed, the NYT can reduce their operating costs, increase their net income, and be less at risk from going into bankruptcy.


By switching from digital to print, the lives of the reader will be facilitated, the environment will improve, and is cost beneficial for both the reader and the NYT.  Readers will get their information faster and more efficiently. The environment will not have to sacrifice thousands of metric tons of paper and natural gas. Most importantly, the reader will save and the NYT will save money from reading digitally. As the age of paper reading is coming to a close, the digital world is developing more each day at a rapid speed. Now it is time to think. Will you make the switch?













Bibliography & Links


http://www.tribune.com/emergence/Tribune_2010_2011_Q32012_Financial_Statements.pdf


http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscriptions-and-purchases.html#purchasesq0


The New York Times. Securities Exchange Commission . 2012. Print. <http://www.nytco.com/investors/financials/annual_reports.html>.










DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.