
Betting man Kushner bought the Register cheap and is investing in it heavily, including one of the biggest hiring sprees in newspaper history. Will it pay off? (Jeb Harris / Orange County Register)
Rob Curley, one of the more prominent digital journalists of the last decade, had just about had it with newspapers. Tired of laying people off and trading print dollars for digital dimes, he quit his job as chief content officer of the Las Vegas Sun last summer to take an executive job at a real-estate company.
But then a relatively unknown investor named Aaron Kushner called. Kushner and his partner, Eric Spitz, had just bought the Orange County Register and had an improbable (some would say impossible) plan to resurrect the gutted paper: Invest heavily in journalism—and in print. “I had no interest in coming to the Register,” says Curley, “but I sat down and talked to him and said, ‘Shoot, I’m coming.’”
Kushner, a 40-year-old former greeting-card executive with zero experience in newspapers, is running the most interesting—and important—experiment in journalism right now. His thesis is simple, but highly contrarian: Newspapers are dying in large part from self-inflicted wounds, and there’s money to be made in print, particularly from subscribers.
The first part of the thesis rests on the fact that publishers, faced with fierce competition from Craigslist and Google, not to mention a severe recession, reacted by slashing their newsrooms and putting out papers so thin, you could read them in minutes. In attempting to maintain double-digit profit margins in the face of an ad market that has changed forever, newspapers undermined—perhaps fatally—their long-term health.
The second part of Kushner’s thesis suggests that publishers listened too long to the siren song of the digital gurus, who told newspapers that they shouldn’t—and couldn’t—charge online, and that print journalism was hopelessly outdated. Plunging circulation stunned publishers, even as they charged hundreds of dollars a year for much weaker papers while giving away their content free online for 15 years.
For Kushner, the answer is to bet on readers. Give them really good journalism—lots of it—and charge them for it. “If we are, every day, giving our subscribers more value, that creates more value for our advertisers, and for the community as a whole, then over the long term we can grow revenue,” he says.
It’s an audacious and expensive bet, and its outcome may reveal whether American newspapers can survive, much less flourish. Is Kushner—whose first entrepreneurial hit, by the way, was a dot-com—squandering his money on a hopelessly outdated business model? Or is he onto something?
“If it were just great journalism, I’d be as skeptical as anybody else,” says Ken Brusic, who’s been the Register’s editor since 2002. “These guys, being from outside the industry, have looked at the business model and really turned it upside down.”
A fresh pair of eyes hasn’t always been a boon to the newspaper industry. Real-estate billionaire Sam Zell was a catastrophe for Tribune Company, and megaflack Brian Tierney flopped in Philadelphia. Avista Capital Partners and its lenders lost half a billion dollars on the Minneapolis StarTribune, and Alden Global Capital couldn’t keep the Journal Register Company from sliding into bankruptcy (again).
All those bankruptcies, save the JRC’s, had something in common: Loads of debt used to fund purchase prices that reflected pre-2008 valuations, and severe cost cuts meant to prop up declining profit margins. Kushner had the benefit of buying Register parent Freedom Communications out of bankruptcy—after newspaper valuations had already fallen 90 percent in some cases. The Register’s newsroom and newshole had been chopped in half over the previous eight years, and its circulation was down 47 percent.

Awesome that someone has the vision to see that content is more than just filler between ads. Good luck to all who want real newspapers.
#1 Posted by Sue Peterson, CJR on Wed 1 May 2013 at 11:39 AM
Nice critical piece, though I wonder if it would have been even this supportive if Kushner weren't a known Obama donor. This is the crux of the matter:
“But how much of the decline in newspaper circulation can be attributed to that, and how much can be attributed to the Internet—who knows?”
The Register is making a bet against the internet, a bet they will lose. I'll hand it to the new management for backing a paywall, the right move, but perhaps it's too closed. I just tried going to their website and of a handful of articles I tried to read, only one, an AP story, would load without registering. While I don't think the highly leaky paywalls of other news sites are a good idea, not letting readers even sample your wares without registering is worse.
The problem newspaper publishers like Kushner face is that the internet has exploded the business model of a "newspaper." There's no reason anymore to stick a bunch of journalists in a newsroom, all feeding copy to a printing press, when any random person can start a blog online and start building an audience, out of the much larger majority that reads online. The internet has disaggregated the newsroom, only these dumb newspaper publishers don't realize it yet. :)
I don't read a single newspaper, print or online, only a handful of free blogs instead. I'd gladly pay these bloggers, but the payment and authentication infrastructure just isn't here yet.
If I were a newspaper publisher, that's what I'd do, provide that infrastructure. Start with providing a technology platform for the journalists and bloggers, so they don't have to configure and secure Wordpress on their own if they don't want to. Build in a single login to paywall all the blog posts, so that once you login to read one OCR writer, all the rest are easily available, while making sure that 10-20% of your content is always available for free, for new readers to sample.
#2 Posted by Ajay, CJR on Wed 1 May 2013 at 07:14 PM
A reader pays $10-20 up front and 1-10 cents is taken out of their account every time they read a post, essentially a micropayments system. If they don't read any articles one month, they don't pay anything either: that's the beauty of a true meter. The writers don't get a salary, they just get some percentage of the revenue from their posts. If you must have a salary, maybe structure it the way Wall Street does: a low base salary with the rest performance-based, say $20k base plus 70% of the micropayments you bring in.
If the publisher really wants to subsidize investigative journalism or other pieces that may not pay for their cost, he may dole out bonuses for those, but such subsidies would be the exception not the rule. A better way would be to charge more for those high-quality pieces, say 10-25 cents/piece, to cover the high cost and small audience. I think such long-form pieces would do very well, if priced right.
This way, the publishers could transition ahead of time to what is coming online, a sea of independent bloggers all paid directly by their readers through micropayments, while still maintaining a cut of the action. They can still print the best OCR blog posts for the dying print audience, though at the right price with no cross-subsidies for online or vice versa.
Will any newspaper publisher actually do any of this? Of course not, they're too fucking stupid. And it's not like any such blogging arrangement would survive in the face of the giant wave of change that's coming, but it would certainly survive longer than clinging to the current model, which every newspaper is doing today.
#3 Posted by Ajay, CJR on Wed 1 May 2013 at 07:16 PM
NY Times charges $20/mo. Boston Globe is $3.99 per week. I am subscribing to both, digital only. Much as I would enjoy subscribing to OC Reg, I will not pay an inflated 1 price fits all, same $ as if I wanted print. They need to have some kind of tiers, for real.
#4 Posted by stretchdogg, CJR on Wed 1 May 2013 at 11:15 PM
A damn poor audit that makes no serious attempt at evaluating the quality of all his original journalism. Kushner has made several boosterish statements that suggest he sees his role as apr flack for local communities. He has rejected pointed political advertising raising he ire of local reformers. His pay to play deal with local colleges stinks to high heaven. Poor work by CJR which swallowed all his talking points without even a token chew
#5 Posted by Mike, CJR on Wed 8 May 2013 at 03:12 PM