評論
打印
There will eventually come a day when The New York Times ceases to publish stories on newsprint.
終有那么一天，《紐約時報》會停止在報紙上出版新聞報道。
Exactly when that day will be is a matter of debate.
但究竟會在哪天到來就需要辯論一番了。
"Sometime in the future," the paper's publisher said back in 2010.
該報的出版商曾在2010年這樣說道：“或許在將來的某一天吧?！?/div>
Nostalgia for ink on paper and the rustle of pages aside, there's plenty of incentive to ditch print.
撇開對油墨字紙張和翻頁的沙沙聲的懷念，舍棄紙質版的動機還是很充分的。
The infrastructure required to make a physical newspaper — printing presses, delivery trucks — isn't just expensive; it's excessive at a time when online — only competitors don't have the same set of financial constraints.
如今做一份紙質版報紙所需要的印刷機、配送卡車等硬件設施不只是貴。在這個只出版電子版的同行報紙都沒有這種資金限制的時代，這些硬件設施的開支算是離譜了。
Readers are migrating away from print anyway.
反正讀者正在從紙質版轉移到電子版。
And though print ad sales still dwarf their online and mobile counterparts, revenue from print is still declining.
盡管紙質版報紙的廣告銷售額仍讓在線和移動報紙相形見絀，但是紙質版報紙的收入仍在下滑。
Overhead may be high and circulation lower, but rushing to eliminate its print edition would be a mistake, says BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti.
“BuzzFeed”首席執行官喬納·佩雷蒂說道：盡管日常開支會很高，同時發行量持續走低，但貿然停止紙質版將會鑄成大錯。
Peretti says the Times shouldn't waste time getting out of the print business, but only if they go about doing it the right way.
佩雷蒂說，《紐約時報》不該浪費時間去想著如何停止紙質版，而應該找到一種正確的方法去解決這件事。
"Figuring out a way to accelerate that transition would make sense for them," he said, "but if you discontinue it, you're going have your most loyal customers really upset with you."
他還說，“對《紐約時報》來說，花時間去想出一個能加快其轉型的辦法才是有意義的，但如果《紐約時報》決定不再出版紙質版，那么這將讓該報的最忠誠的顧客們失望至極”
Sometimes that's worth making a change anyway.
但不管怎樣，有時候轉型還是很值得的。
Peretti gives the example of Netflix discontinuing its DVD-mailing service to focus on streaming.
佩雷蒂給出了“Netflix”終止向顧客郵寄DVD業務，而專注去做流媒體的例子。
"It was seen as blunder," he said.
他說，當時那被看做是愚蠢的錯誤。
The move turned out to be foresighted.
但此舉證明是很有先見之明的。
And if Peretti were in charge at the Times?
如果佩雷蒂負責《紐約時報》，他會有何行動？
"I wouldn't pick a year to end print," he said "I would raise prices and make it into more of a legacy product."
他說，我不會選擇在某一年停止出版紙質版，相反，我不僅要提高價格，還要將它變為一種可以傳承的產物。
The most loyal customers would still get the product they favor, the idea goes, and they'd feel like they were helping sustain the quality of something they believe in.
這樣，那些最忠誠的顧客們依舊會買他們一直喜歡的產品，產品的思想就能傳播，并且他們會覺得這是在支持他們所信任的產品保持質量。
"So if you're overpaying for print, you could feel like you were helping," Peretti said.
“因此，如果繼續高價購買紙質報紙，人們會覺得自己是在伸出援手，”佩雷蒂說道。
"Then increase it at a higher rate each year and essentially try to generate additional revenue."
“然后每年使其價格以比較高比率增長，以此獲得額外收入”。
In other words, if you're going to make a print product, make it for the people who are already obsessed with it.
換句話說，如果你想做一份紙質版報紙，那就選擇那些已經癡迷于它們的人吧。
Which may be what the Times is doing already.
這或許也是《紐約時報》已經在做的事。
Getting the print edition seven days a week costs nearly $500 a year — more than twice as much as a digital — only subscription.
每周七天都訂一份制止報紙，一年就要花近500美元——比只訂閱電子版的費用貴了一倍多。
"It's a really hard thing to do and it's a tremendous luxury that BuzzFeed doesn't have a legacy business," Peretti remarked.
佩雷蒂指出，要不要舍棄紙質版確實是一個艱難的決定，但BuzzFeed沒有的遺產業務，這一點極其難得，
"But we're going to have questions like that where we have things we're doing that don't make sense when the market changes and the world changes.
但當市場和世界形勢發生變化時，我們正在做的事情就會變得沒有意義，這時候我們也會面臨“要不要舍棄報紙的紙質版”類似的難題。
In those situations, it's better to be more aggressive that less aggressive."
在這種情況下，更激進的舉措要好于不痛不癢之舉。
