After only two months in circulation, the New Day is to close due to poor sales. But why did such a seemingly popular addition to our daily news fail so quickly?
I was convinced it was going to revolutionise the newspaper industry. The bite-sized, easy to digest news is just what we need in our busy lives, while its bold graphics made it stand out, and its attention grabbing front pages captured readers instantly. It had a fresh take on features, focusing more on people than products, and it made striking use of photography, giving it visual appeal.
The New Day felt like it came from the same family as Metro, Shortlist and Stylist: easy to read, informative and entertaining. But what the latter three publications all have in common is their distribution method. You can pick them up on public transport or from stands in high footfall locations, and the major appeal is the cost: all three are free.
Could the New Day have survived if it had been a free sheet? I would say undoubtedly yes. The premium advertising rates charged by titles like Metro or Stylist surely go to show that revenue can be generated by creating a title that people look forward to reading.
Of course there have to be limitations on the number of publications that are distributed on our transport networks, but why not give people a choice of what they want to read? Maybe that’s the real way forward for print media? People have a choice of which newspaper to buy, so why not give them options on which one to pick up for free?
I’m sad to see the end of the New Day, and I’m not alone. Its Facebook page is full of supportive comments. Who knows, perhaps Trinity Mirror will take heed of some of the positive vibes and find a way of giving it another day…