As usual, there is a wealth of interesting data in the study, confirming what appears to be the general consensus. A particularly interesting tidbit:

“The practice of coming across news inadvertently on the internet is prevalent among all age groups, but is most popular among the very young: 84% of 18-24-year-old online news users get news in this way, compared with about three-quarters (73%) of internet news users between 25 and 64, and just 58% of those 65 and older.

This is one of several ways in which the online news habits of very young people differ from older people. For example, a solid majority of online news users younger than 25 (64%) say they more often follow links to news stories, rather than go directly to the home pages of news sources; nearly half (48%) of those aged 25-29 do this, compared with only a third (34%) of those just a few years younger.”

Are these differences generational or related to life-stage transitions? It’s difficult for us to speculate as to what might be the generational difference between a 24 year-old and a 26 year-old. And indeed, it is tempting to say this is purely generational because that’s the way the data is presented.

But as Youth Media DNA found, young people tend to drop the newspaper habit between the ages of 18 and 25, and especially when they move from living with their parents to living alone or with roommates.

Interestingly, they become more traditional in their news orientation when they live as couples or with children and newspaper readership rises again.

We suspect that if Pew were to break down these patterns by life-stage, particularly in terms of living situation, educational attainment, and career designation, a clearer picture may emerge as to what accounts for these differences, and what newspaper organizations should do about it, and when.

It may well be that as young people grow older, they become more trusting of authoritative sources. It may be that they have less time to follow links sent by friends and are more likely to regiment their news consumption.

This article from 2004 speculated that young people are increasingly unwilling to pay for news information. The strategies offered involved a) introducing free newspapers as a way of introducing youth to the habit of newspaper reading.

In 2008, we’ve seen the results of that approach. In the Netherlands, and Finland, almost half of those surveyed in Youth Media DNA read a free newspaper at least once a week. In the U.S. however, free newspaper readership hovers at just under 15%, probably because they are not widely available.

Interestingly, however, free newspaper reading doesn’t appear to be driving anything other than free newspaper reading. Few people surveyed describe them as credible, relevant, or good for depth or breadth of coverage. And few youth say that free newspapers play an important role in their news diet.

So the experiment with free newspapers appears to only made an impact in so far as it still makes sense as business model. With the advent of other mobile content delivery systems, it will be interesting if free newspapers will be able to defend their market share among youth. If, in the next years, smart phones take off (and cell phone companies charge prices people are willing to pay for mobile content), what will young people opt for?

This article about Metro’s continuing troubles does not bode well for the future of free newspapers.

Newspaper websites are much more sophisticated than ever before. Many newspaper companies either partner with free newspapers or sell some of their own.

Many in the newspaper industry see Facebook, Myspace and other social networking sites as competitors for reader time.  The theory being that leisure time that young people chatting with each other  eats into the time available for newspaper reading…

Contrary to common fears in the news business, Youth Media DNA found that the social networking phenomenon does not appear to be a significant threat to the relationships young people have with newspapers. In fact, social networking users are higher all-around consumers of news media, display just as much interest in news, and are more likely to have favourable opinions of newspaper content. In the U.S., for example, those who use social networking sites are equally likely to say they regularly use a paid newspaper. In all countries, regular social network users are far more likely to describe paid newspapers credible as sources of news, and just as likely to feel a paid newspaper contains information relevant to their lives.

In the three countries surveyed thus far for Youth Media DNA,  this message does not appear to be overwhelmingly accepted.  In the U.S., for example newspapers are far less likely to be seen as credible as television news sources.  In Finland and the Netherlands, newspapers are, at best, seen as equally credible as television.

These findings indicate that a key component of the value of newspaper content is not currently understood by younger populations.  Clearly, more needs to be done to educate the public about the value of the newspaper organization as a news gathering entity.

What can newspaper companies do to ensure that young people don’t ditch the newspaper when they ditch their parents?

http://www.wan-press.org/article17402.html