The new york times company: a case Study Analysis

Дата канвертавання24.04.2016
Памер92.02 Kb.

John J. Head

WestCom Group Consulting Inc.

School of Communication

Telecommunications Management 4480

Western Michigan University

1903 West Michigan Avenue

Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008

November 8, 2012

©2012 John J Head

Source: New York Times Co.

Table of Contents

I. Historical Overview 1

Early steps 2

Diversification 3

Challenges, changes 4

II. Organizational structure 5

Table 1 5

III. Business Operations 6

Table 2 7

The flagship 8

IV. Financial performance 9

Table 3 9

V. Future outlook 11

Branding 11

SWOT analysis and other risks 12

Table 4 13

Demographics 15

Philosophy 16



“All the News That’s Fit to Print.”

Special are those instances in business when a slogan becomes so synonymous with a company. Those words, found on the front page of every copy of every edition of The New York Times since 1896, began as a way to define the publication to its readership. That slogan stands to this day, but the newspaper and its parent, The New York Times Company, have grown far beyond the reaches of New York City and its surrounding boroughs.

The New York Times Company is a diversified media company whose core purpose is “to enhance society by creating, collecting and distributing high-quality news, information and entertainment.”1 It is a publicly traded company (NYTC on the New York Stock Exchange) and publishes three major daily newspapers. It also operates eight network-affiliated television stations and two New York City radio stations. The company has become more global in nature through The Times Syndicate: Among the largest syndicates in the world, it specializes in text, photos, graphics in a variety of customized packages to more than 2,000 newspapers and other media to clients in more than 50 countries.2

While its footprint today is global, The New York Daily Times (the word “Daily” would be dropped in 1857) had a simple, straightforward and — at least, structurally — humble beginning in 1851, in a rundown six-story brownstone building on Nassau Street in New York City.3 Move forward to August 19, 1896, a Wednesday morning, and The New York Time’s readers were greeted on page one with the following salutation:


To undertake the management of The New York Times, with its great history of right doing, and to attempt to keep bright the luster which Henry J. Raymond and George Jones have given it, is an extraordinary task. But if a sincere desire to conduct a high-standard newspaper, clean, dignified and trustworthy, requires for success honesty, watchfulness, earnestness, industry, and practical knowledge applied with common sense, I entertain the hope that I can succeed and maintain the high estimate that thoughtful, pure-minded people have ever had of The New York Times.

It will be my earnest aim that The New York Times give the news, all the news, in concise and attractive form, in language that is permissible in good society, … to give the news impartially, without fear or favor … to make (it) a forum for the consideration of all questions of public importance, and to that end to invite intelligent discussion from all shades of opinion.4
Adolph S. Ochs, who assumed management of the newspaper in 1896 from the newspaper’s founders, the aforementioned Raymond and Jones, penned that announcement. Ochs’ intent was to continue the course set by his predecessors in producing a newspaper consistent in its delivery of news unfettered by bias and scandal.
Early steps


he company’s origins date back to September 1851, when the first issue of The New York Daily Times was published. Messrs. Raymond and Jones founded the publication on the premise of offering the news “in a conservative and objective fashion, in contrast to the yellow journalism of the day … .”5 The paper’s coverage of key events — President Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and the Battle of Bull Run among them — made the Times the newspaper of record. Under Raymond and Jones’s guidance the publication grew. Their subsequent deaths, in 1869 and 1891, respectively, and the handing of the newspaper to their ill-equipped heirs nearly resulted in the paper’s failure. It was near bankruptcy in 1896 when a respected, albeit little-known, newspaper editor named Adolph Simon Ochs came on the scene.6

Despite his lack of formal schooling, Ochs had learned the newspaper business on the job as newsboy, printer’s devil, printer, and reporter. He was 20 when he bought controlling interest in and became publisher of the failing Chattanooga Times; hearing of the financial troubles at The New York Times, he offered to become publisher in exchange for a contract that would reward him should he achieve his goal of making the paper profitable for three straight years. One of his first decisions was to add the slogan “All the News That’s Fit to Print,” his commitment to avoidance of sensationalism and adherence to high editorial standards;7 but of particular note was his decision to respond to dwindling capital in 1898 not by raising the single-copy price of the paper, but rather by reducing it, from three cents to a penny. Paid circulation tripled within a year, advertising increased, and the paper turned a profit.8 As much to his business acumen as to his commitment to his readership, Ochs set The Times on a path of steady growth and profitability.


Ochs’ ill health and subsequent death in 1935 handed the reins of the paper to Ochs’ son-in-law, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. He improved the newspaper editorially, financially and technically, and began what would be a series of moves to diversify and acquire other properties, including Amo Press and Cowles newspaper, magazine, television, and book properties.9

The diversification continued throughout the 1900s. In 1980 the company paid approximately $100 million for the New Jersey cable television operation; in 1984 it sold its book publishing operation to Random House. Five regional newspapers and two television stations were acquired, as were the magazines Golf World and Sailing World; at the same time the company, making little progress with cable television, sold all its cable TV properties.12
Challenges, changes

Newspaper readership decline in the 1990s prompted the company to buy and sell in the areas of print, broadcasting and electronic media. In 1993 NYTC purchased Affiliated Publications, which owned the Boston Globe; in 1995 it bought a majority interest in a video newsgathering company, Video News International. Also in 1995, the company joined eight other newspaper companies in New Century Network, an online news service. It also created the New York Times Electronic Media Company to develop new products and methods of distribution.11 This sparked the beginning of a fervent move from the print world of its origins to the rapidly growing world of digital media.

NewYorkTimes Digital, an independent business unit, was created to oversee the company’s online presence, (by this time boasting more than 10 million registered users). Key to its plans to establish synergies between print and electronic offerings, was created as one of the top Internet providers of financial and investment news, and related commentary. Its second business segment, the About Group, includes websites, and, among others. The company also owns equity interests in a Canadian newsprint company, and quadrantONE LLC, an online advertising network that sells premium, targeted display advertising onto local newspaper and related websites.12


II. Organizational Structure

Broadly defined, The New York Times Company is in the business of disseminating news. The Times’ group includes the International Herald Tribune and the Worcester Telegram and Gazette, as well as related websites and businesses. Other assets include a 17-percent interest in New England Sports Ventures LLC (which owns the Boston Red Sox, Fenway Park and adjacent property) and about 80 percent of New England Sports Network, a regional cable network that broadcasts Red Sox games (see Table 1).13

Table 1.

Key components of The New York Times Company.


Digital Ops

Joint Ventures

Other Assets

NYTimes Media Group

• The New York Times


• International Herald Tribune

New England Media Group

• The Boston Globe



• Worcester Telegram and Gazette

• 16 regional daily newspapers

• New England
Sports Network

About Group





• (paid products)

• Metro Boston LLC (49%)

• Donohue Malbaie Inc. (49%)

• Madison

Paper Industries (40%)

• quadrantONE LLC

(25%, online ad network)

• New England

Sports Ventures LLC

• Roush Fenway Racing

• AK Networks

• Appssavvy

• Brightcove

FM Publishing

• Betaworks

Source: Ward’s Business Directory, September 201214



While the parent company of The New York Times has grown and diversified, it has stayed true to the principles to which the newspaper ascribed more than 150 years ago. Those principles are uppermost in the company’s corporate governance practices and are directly tied to the company’s journalistic roots: “The Company’s core purpose is to enhance society by creating, collecting and distributing high-quality news, information and entertainment.”15 These values also weigh significantly on the company’s business philosophy by offering content of the highest quality and integrity (the basis for its reputation and maintaining the public trust); fair treatment of employees based on respect, accountability and standards of excellence; creating long-term stockholder value through investment and constancy of purpose; and good corporate citizenship.16

s with any publicly traded company, shareholders’ return on investment must be considered in the business philosophy. In the world of journalism, particularly as it pertains to newspapers, this poses an ongoing challenge: to maintain balance between journalistic integrity and purpose to the betterment of community (audience) and ensure the products and services (newspapers, other media) remain profitable. In spite of a continuing industry-wide decline in circulation — and, as a result, advertising revenue tied to its core print products — the company has fared better than most largely through diversification. It should be noted that while some of the company’s overall business commitments display variety, much of its diversification has been born out of common sense; that is, those business ventures tangential to the company are the result of logical consideration of and connection to the core principles and products.

We will look at some of those products later. Here, in Table 2, is a breakdown of the company’s operational structure. The chief executive officer of The New York Times Company oversees the managers of the company’s 11 primary divisions. The CEO reports to the company’s board of directors and its vice chairman. The primary division managers in turn oversee various sublevels of the corporate structure.

Table 2.

Management structure of The New York Times Company.


CFO Assistant Control

Internal Audit


New York Times

International Herald Tribune

New England Media

CEO Legal Secretary & Assistant Legal


Vice Chairman of the Board

Board of Directors Communication

Development Research & Development Ops

Digital Ops/About Group Paid Products

Human Resources Human Resources / Diversity

Compensation / Benefits

Organization Capability

Source:, September 201217


As CEO, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. oversees all primary divisions of the company and reports to the board of directors. The corporate structure is straightforward and caters to the company’s focus on its core products — print media. At the same time, this makes for a seamless connection between print and broadcast media services and the ever-more important division of digital media.

The Flagship

The New York Times serves more than the residents of New York City: Its reach extends nationally and globally. The newspaper boasts a print circulation of 779,731 daily and 1.26 million on Sundays. In addition, the company has found success since venturing into the digital news dissemination domain in January 1996 with the launch of its website, The paper’s digital efforts since then have resulted in a 73-percent increase in overall daily circulation, print and online, year over year ending March 2012, and a nearly 50-percent increase on Sundays.18


he Times maintains a high online profile while positioning itself for improving revenue in this portion of the market. The newspaper had maintained free access to its online product prior to 2011 when it began structuring online packages from which customers could choose. At that time, the company allowed non-subscribers (to either the print or the online version) access to up to 20 stories a month for free. In mid-March 2012, a year after its launch of paid digital subscriptions, the company reported it had approximately 454,000 paid subscribers to its various digital packages, replica editions and e-readers. Included in this number are subscribers of The International Herald. At the same time the company announced it would cut back from 20 to 10 the number of free articles accessible to non-subscribers.19


The meteoric rise of computer use by the consumer — with particular emphasis on smartphones and tablets — has driven an equally explosive increase in the number of venues from which consumers can get their news. Newspapers of every size and type have wrestled with this modern reality: that the world of print in which they long thrived was becoming less viable. Reinvention of its method of delivery — or, at the very least, an addendum to that delivery system — has become tantamount for survival. The New York Times Company’s products, while certainly in better financial shape than many newspapers to make this transition, are no less impervious to the storm. Table 3 below illustrates a recent decline in revenues.

Table 3.

New York Times Company Business Analysis.


Report Date












News Media Group




About Group








Source: The New York Times (


hough not reflected in this table, financials from quarter three of 2012 illustrate — dramatically — the importance of transition to digital. The company’s net income fell 85 percent from the same period in 2011, as reported in The Financial Times. Any gains in circulation revenue in the media group failed to offset the almost 9 percent decline in advertising revenues from the third quarter last year.21

The News Media Group, which includes print and digital properties, declined each of the past three full years back to 2009, although the drop in revenue was subtle. This trend continues nine months into 2012: According to Business Wire, the news media group’s total revenues for January-September 2012 were down 2.2 percent compared to the same period in 2011. More significantly, advertising revenue — which had dropped 6.9 percent in 2011 from 2010 — continued to fall during the same period in 2012, down 9.7 percent. Of particular significance to the News Media Group during this same period was the 9.5-percent decline in national advertising lineage, a key revenue draw that outpaces retail and classified ad lineage nearly three to one. On a positive note, thanks to steadily growing online subscriptions, circulation in this division increased 9.3 percent in the first nine months of 2012, compared to a year ago. Given the company’s continuing trend to promote its online product, as well as the stability of the brand, it is likely digital subscriptions will grow.22

Numerous factors come into play when reviewing any newspaper’s financial standing, advertising and circulation being the two most considered. While advertising and total revenue declined during that three-year period, decisions to divest some of its assets helped serve as a buffer for the company’s bottom line. As late as August 2012, the company decided to sell the About Group, parent company of and other online sites, to InterActiveCorp for $300 million.23 This followed a December 2011 decision to sell its Regional Media Group to Halifax Media Holdings for more than $140 million.24



We live in an age when information is at our fingertips and instantly obtainable. If the day of the personal computer has given way to smartphones and social media, then surely the information dissemination model so long used by newspapers — print and advertising — will continue to be increasingly irrelevant. That said, there are multiple factors at play that warrant us to be optimistic, albeit cautiously, about the future of The New York Times Company and, specifically, its publications. Many of these factors are positive in nature; others, however, give reason for some concern as the company moves forward in an industry where many players are on unsure financial and viability grounds. We will look at the following as we consider the Times’ future: branding, SWOT analysis and other risks, demographics, and philosophy.



t is difficult to put a dollar value on branding, but in the case of The New York Times (and tangentially its parent company), the name carries much weight when considering its future. The newspaper has a long and rich history as a member of the Fourth Estate, particularly enriched during the 34 years when Arthur Sulzberger was at the helm as publisher. Certainly high among his contributions was his decision in 1971 to publish the Pentagon Papers, detailing how the U.S. government had lied about the Vietnam War.25 The decision earned the newspaper a Pulitzer Prize, one of more than 100 the newspaper earned since 1918.26 Despite moments of journalistic scandal, including the 2003 revelation that reporter Jayson Blair had plagiarized or made up numerous stories, The New York Times name remains a positive in the sense of branding.27

SWOT Analysis and Other Risks

Newspaper executives continue to face tough personnel and staffing decisions as they confront the industry’s transformation from print to digital. The economics of newspapering were, at best, a roller-coaster ride during the past 20 years as the Internet provided more options for news readers; at worst, these times saw — and continue to see — newspapers cutting editorial staff to make up for lost print ad revenue, revenue not yet fully realized in the online platform. According to Times’ records, the company overall peaked in 2000 with 14,000 employees; by 2010, that number was 7,414, with staffing declines posted each year except for two years (2002-04) when additions to the About Group saw a slight increase.28

September 2012 saw the death of Arthur Sulzberger, but despite the love and respect he engendered in his staff and the industry, the passing of the publisher nicknamed “Punch” is hardly the most significant development in Times’ personnel matters. In August 2012 Mark Thompson was named as the company’s new chief executive officer, a position the younger Sulzberger had held on an interim basis since 2011. Thompson had been director-general of the British Broadcast Corporation (BBC) from 2004 until March 2012, and his success with the publicly funded broadcaster helped him secure the Times’ CEO spot. However, his possible involvement in the cancellation of a BBC-produced investigation into a sex scandal involving Jimmy Savile — one of the BBC’s and the United Kingdom’s most beloved celebrities — has raised questions about his viability as Times CEO.29 Indeed, despite Sulzberger’s reassurance that Thompson “possesses high ethical standards and is the ideal person to lead our company as we focus on growing our business through digital and global expansion,” at least one Times senior editor, Margaret Sullivan, said it was time to ask a number of tough questions concerning Thompson’s suitability for the Times position. “It’s worth considering now whether he is the right person for the job, given this turn of events,” she said in reference to the Savile sex scandal.30

Thompson is scheduled to begin his duties at The Times on November 12, 2012. It remains to be seen if his appointment, which some analysts think might have contributed to an 85-percent plunge in third-quarter (2012) net earnings for the company, will stand.31

In the company report dated December 22, 2011, the SWOT analysis overview identified the following, illustrated in Table 4:

Table 4.

New York Times Company SWOT analysis overview.





• Multi-platform presence by strengthening the digital business

• Lack of significant international presence

• Growing consumption of digital media

• Declining circulations and print advertisement revenues

• Wide reach

• Poor credit ratings

• Rebound in advertisement spending and rising online advertisement spending

• Rising newsprint cost

• Leaner operating cost structure

• Monetizing the digital business through subscription model

• Intense competition

Source: MarketLine, 201232

This SWOT analysis can offer a look not only at The New York Times, but at many newspapers, for many share similar positives and, certainly, many of the constraints, particularly in the financial, circulation and advertising sectors. Addressing such problems as poor credit ratings is a necessary honest approach to any company’s business position: In the Times’ case, this review of the 2011 year recognized the company’s credit rating increased the borrowing costs for future borrowing and also limited its financing options. It also pointed a finger at the susceptibility to continued or increased volatility or disruption in the credit markets that could adversely affect the company’s ability to refinance existing debt. On the positive side, the company had established a multi-platform presence by strengthening its posture in the digital business, witnessed the growing consumption of digital media among its customers, and saw a rebound in the advertisement spending and an increase in ad dollars spent online. Additionally, the company launched new pay models to better profit from the growth in digital business. The newspaper’s increase in online subscriptions in the past year gives validity to the decision in 2010 to erect a paywall and limit the number of free stories available to non-subscribers. In short, people are willing to pay for content online that once had been freely accessed.33


For nearly two decades newspapers have straddled the fence between traditional print publication and a digital or online presence. Much of that stems from a sort of perfect storm: print circulations in decline, falling ad revenues as a result of fewer subscribers (lower circulation numbers), and the increased competition from a variety of news sources, including aggregation websites. The company recognizes all these factors in its consideration of threats, and the resulting challenges are not for the timid. In its 2011 annual report, NYTC noted the launch of digital subscriptions at all three major dailies, “with the intention of developing a new consumer revenue stream while preserving our digital advertising business. Our ability to build a subscriber base on our digital platforms depends on market acceptance, consumer habits, pricing, an adequate online infrastructure, terms of delivery platforms, and other factors.”34 It further acknowledges the “increasing number of … options available on the Internet, and other news aggregation outlets, often offering their content for free. The point is well taken that consumers in a tight and uncertain economy might place more value on when, where, how and at what price they get their digital content than they do on the source or reliability of the content. When much is riding on the potential for digital-framed ad revenue, the potential loss in website traffic becomes a risk.35


According to information obtained by Mediamark Research and Intelligence, The New York Times was read or viewed by more than 4.5 million people during the spring of 2012. Of that number, readership by gender was 50-50, with a median age of 51 years and median household income of $99,669. Also, about 60 percent of Times’ audience were college graduates “plus” (bachelors or higher), 42 percent were professional/managerial, and 13 percent were top management level.36 While these figures are not surprising on their face, given The Times’ status and national reach, it stresses the importance of The Times’ pushing the digital platform as both a readership venue and a source of revenue. The audience that supplants the aging baby boomers who are Times’ subscribers and readers increasingly are more likely to look for their news online rather than print. To this end the company continues to transform “from a newspaper company to a multi-platform news and information company,” according to company documents.37 Additionally, in its effort to open the newsroom doors to the public, launched in 2010 TimesCast, a daily video report that features interviews with editors and reporters covering major news stories, and scenes from staff meetings among top editors discussing possible front-page content. Such interactive structure adds transparency to what for generations had been seen, rightly or wrongly, as an ivory tower mentality among members of the Fourth Estate. This interactive discipline is seen elsewhere in The Times’ products, through online blogs written by staff reporters and correspondents, membership packages that allow subscribers to post commentary on stories and opinion pieces, and reporters encouraged to engage their readers via Twitter, Facebook and other social media.38


Arthur Sulzberger died on Sept. 29, 2012, at age 86. He retired in 1992 and was succeeded by his son, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. The young Sulzberger’s predecessors were newspapermen, but Sulzberger Jr. described himself as a “platform-agnostic” multimedia man, perhaps the perfect man for the job in a constantly transforming industry.39 As Steve Jobs was a visionary in his field, so in some respects Sulzberger Jr. has been to The New York Times Company. He has maintained his father’s fervent belief in the principles that guide journalistic integrity, and has married that to the pressing needs of newspaper survival in the digital age. He is not afraid to consider all options that might lead to a better newspaper and an improved company. Several examples:

• In 2010, The New York Times and The Washington Post teamed up with Google Inc. to test a new online news presentation style. The two-month experiment, according to Martin Nisenholtz, married “Google’s purely Web-centric sensibility and the journalistic sensibility” of the Times and the Post. Nisenholtz, The Times’ senior vice president for digital operations, said the union created one destination page for each of nine test storylines published in both newspapers. Dubbed “Living Stories”, the experiment let readers filter and organize the articles by subtopic, by type, by importance and by date. Each time a user visited the story’s page, articles they already had read were grayed out, allowing them to focus on the latest news. It was a look at a different way to organize the content, Nisenholtz said.40

• Ensuring viability in expanding technologies, in October 2012 The Times announced a new app, featuring the newspaper’s latest content, designed and formatted for optimal reading experience on Windows 8. This outreach to fans and users of Microsoft-related products also included the newspaper establishing its own channel within the Bing News app, which is pre-installed on all Windows 8 devices, including desktop and laptop computers, and the Microsoft Surface tablet.41

In conclusion and to reiterate, the future of The New York Times Company, like its flagship product, should be viewed with optimism, with a dash of caution added. There remains uncertainty throughout the newspaper industry about the viability and continuation of the traditional news delivery system, and forces from competition, variable and /or declining print circulation numbers and advertising revenues, the need to add to or let go of related properties or joint venture assets all figure into the mix of this company’s future.


o be sure, for The New York Times, its dismal third-quarter net revenues sparked cause for concern, despite its successful digital-and-print subscription model and international expansion. In late October of this year, Rick Edmonds, writing in his blog for, cautioned that, “If the top dog stumbles after a new round of advertising setback, the rest of the pack seems even more vulnerable.” Whether it was intended as a backhanded compliment, it speaks to both the seriousness of the issue to The Times and how, as The Times goes, so goes the industry. Company officials blamed the loss on lack of business confidence in many segments, but also on other factors: the lack of major movie releases (entertainment), weak department store retail sales, and the lack of new development in the New York market (real estate). Add to this, Edmonds wrote, that The New York Times differs from many daily papers because of its greater dependence on national advertising lineage. On the upside, he noted the company’s digital-only subscription base continues to grow. The Times — and the industry — will need “strong digital-only gains and income from other digital ventures” to make up for losses in retail advertising.42

To its benefit The New York Times remains a brand to which many people relate, and its parent company has shown an understanding of the need for its news products to transition to a new delivery system, one that caters to today’s generation of news consumers. It closely monitors all of its segments from both financial return and customer benefit perspectives, giving no reason to believe it cannot survive the industry’s turbulent waters. The company is not afraid to face challenge and adapt, a philosophy that began with the first editions of The New York Daily Times.

In a 2005 interview with Business Week, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. said:

Within our lifetimes, the distribution of news and information is going to shift to broadband. We must enter the broadband world having mastered the three key skill sets — print, Internet, and video — because that’s what’s going to ensure the future of the news organization in the years ahead.43



  1. Elmer Davis, History of the New York Times 1851-1921. New York Times. Retrieved Sept. 29, 2012.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company. Retrieved Sept. 29, 2012.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. Elmer Davis, History of the New York Times 1851-1921. New York Times.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. International Directory of Company Histories, The New York Times Company.

  1. Ward’s Business Directory of US. Private and Public Companies, New York Times Company, Gale Directory Library. Retrieved Sept. 29, 2012.


  1. Ward’s Business Directory of US. Private and Public Companies, New York Times Company.

  1. The New York Times Company, Company business units. Retrieved Sept. 29, 2012.

  1. The New York Times Company, Company business units.

  1. New York Times Company, Organizational Chart. The Official Retrieved Sept. 29, 2012.

  1. Neil Lulofs, The Top U.S. Newspapers for March 2012. Retrieved Sept. 29, 2012.

  1. Eileen Murphy, Pay Gate to Move to 10 Free Articles Each Month Starting in April, BusinessWire. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.

  1. New York Times Company, Business Analysis, Retrieved Oct. 27, 2012.

  1. Emily Steel, NY Times hit by fall in ad dollars. Financial Times. Business Insights: Global.|A306443729/dfa338898e28f1fea944137ffed817b?u=lom_wmich. Retrieved Oct. 27, 2012.

  1. Business Wire, The New York Times Company Reports 2012 Third-Quarter Results. Business Insights: Global. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.

  1. Kevin Shalvey, IAC to Buy from New York Times for $300M. Investor’s Business Daily. Retrieved Sept. 27, 2012.

  1. Zacks Equity Research, NY Times Offloads Assets. Business Insights: Global. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.

  1. Alex S. Jones, Arthur Sulzberger. Time. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.

  1. New York Times Company, company business units. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.


  1. Bloomberg Businessweek, The Future of the New York Times. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.


  1. MarketLine, SWOT Analysis Overview. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.

  1. Keach Hagey. Corporate News: Times Co. Stands by Incoming CEO. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.

  1. Independent (London, England), Thompson may not be right person to run New York Times, says senior editor. Business Insights: Global. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2012.

  1. Keach Hagey. Corporate News: Times Co. Stands by Incoming CEO. Wall Street Journal.

  1. MarketLine, SWOT Analysis Overview.

  1. Gina Lovett, The New York Times Company prepares for paywall launch. New Media Age. Retrieved Oct. 21, 2012.

  1. New York Times Company, 2012 Annual Report: Risk Factors. New York Times Company. Retrieved Oct 20, 2012.

  1. New York Times Company, 2012 Annual Report: Risk Factors. New York Times Company.

  1. New York Times Company, company business units.

  1. New York Times Company, company business units.

  1. New York Times Company, company business units.

  1. Bloomberg Businessweek, The Future of the New York Times.

  1. Abby Brownback, A Web-Centric Approach to Traditional Journalism. American Journalism Review. Retrieved Sept. 29, 2012.


  1. M2 EquityBites [EQB], The New York Times introduces new app for Windows 8. Business Insights: Global.|A306456609/027388dc8bf19be4654dbb3de4207f1a?=lom_wmich. Retrieved Oct. 27, 2012.


  1. Rick Edmonds, What dismal earnings at The New York Times mean for the newspaper industry. Retrieved Oct. 27, 2012.

  1. B
    loomberg Businessweek, The Future of the New York Times.

База данных защищена авторским правом © 2016
звярнуцца да адміністрацыі

    Галоўная старонка