Sly's dilemma is Mirror of problem for all

Published on Thursday 4 October 2007 01:13

TRYING to put as positive a spin as possible on Trinity Mirror's failure to sell off some of its regional newspapers, Sly Bailey, its chief executive, spoke of her determination to pursue the group's "technology-led operating model".

This statement was met with a measure of sarcasm by a sceptical Financial Times commentator, but it reflected the company's acute problem in trying to accomplish the expensive move from newsprint to screen against a background of falling sales in both its national and regional newspapers. Compared to others making the transition, Trinity Mirror has fewer resources.

It has now jettisoned the Racing Post, one of its guaranteed money-makers, and its accompanying sports division. Yet it is stuck with its unwanted Midlands titles, such as the Birmingham Post and the Coventry Telegraph. So a disposal programme that was expected to put a smile on shareholders' faces by realising up to 600 million has netted just 263 million, and much of that will be swallowed up by pension obligations and transaction costs.

The company remains profitable, of course, and investors will get a reasonable return from the sales, but the fall in Trinity Mirror's share-price reveals the City's underlying anxiety. If Bailey is to assuage those concerns, she will need to press ahead speedily with the "technology-led operating model" she announced last December. Her papers must secure new audiences or, at least, prevent them vanishing.

Of course, she is hardly alone in pursuing a multimedia strategy. Every traditional media owner is riding two horses now, print and online, investing in a future that, to be honest, no-one can clearly visualise. Owners are engaged in a collective act of blind faith by investing in websites that deliver news fast but deliver revenue, if at all, very slowly. Newsprint does the opposite.

In such circumstances, it is difficult to keep a sense of proportion, especially when a mustang has been loosed in the form of free papers. The level of competition on all fronts is relentless, so is it possible to devise a rational response? When I spoke of the two horses to Lionel Barber, the Financial Times editor, he took up the analogy by asserting his paper is a fully fledged stallion, rather than a nag, and he cast his online division, FT.com, as a gelding that is growing stronger day by day.

Having just freed up some of the website's content ahead of the anticipated dropping of the "paywall" at the Wall Street Journal, its New York-based rival, he knows the battleground is shifting away from print to screen. But, like everyone else engaged in this business, the paper cannot be ignored. The FT's way of maintaining a hold on both forms of delivery was its integration of newsroom staff, an initiative taken up by the Daily Telegraph.

The Guardian, give or take a journalists' strike, is moving towards the same goal. Several regional papers, large and small, have dared to take a similar step. Journalists are getting used to swapping horses throughout the day, and fewer are falling off as they get used to the different kinds of saddle.

As yet, none of the largest selling papers has dared to make that transition. Perhaps Bailey will become the pioneer with a complete integration of the Mirror's newsroom, not as part of a cost-cutting exercise, but as a way of bringing the horses closer together and preparing for that time when all news will be delivered through a computer.