I read the news today oh boy...

Why are newspapers going out of business? Because they always seem to be years behind everyone else.

If I ran one of the major newspaper companies like New York Times, Hearst, McClatchey, MediaNews Group, Lee, etc. I wouldn't operate out of fear or be reactive--I'd be proactive. At this point what do newspapers have to lose? They are already losing.

There are no instant fixes for newspapers but here are a few thoughts:

1. Newspapers won't print on paper forever. Why aren't these newspaper companies coming together and investing in companies like Amazon, which owns the Kindle, or investing in epaper? It would save them billions of dollars a year by not printing on paper and the cost of investing in this future technology wouldn't cost anywhere near that. Even better, give the new epaper product to current and future subscribers. You'd still be saving money as a collection of papers and probably find the one thing newspapers can't find now: new subscribers. Just sign them up for a 3 year subscription in return they get the epaper reader.

2. Why do newspapers concede ownership of news aggregation to the likes of Yahoo, Google, MSN, AOL, Digg, etc? I'd create a newspaper coalition and buy or build a portal property and become the owner of my own destiny rather than hoping that your story gets picked up and you get Dugg. Within that newspaper portal I'd create the best news search engine.

3. Build better classifieds. Video, audio, and more. Craigslist is the minimalist's answer to classifieds so make them better. Not just better, make them great. Then, print the classifieds. Craig can't do that.

4. Create a newspaper site that allows the users to build their own section. If I like crafts then let me build a crafts section. Even more niche would be a sewing section under crafts. Let the user build the section and we'll filter the stories from around the world of interest to people who sew. It's not impossible to build niche sections--Ebay does it. Newspapers need to stop deciding what people want and let them show us.

Sometimes the wrong move creates an opening for your worst enemies

A few days ago Google released their browser Chrome. It's got some neat features but you have to wonder if this doesn't create an opening for Microsoft or Yahoo.

I understand that it looks like it could go the opposite direction--after all it is a direct jab at Microsoft. However it also takes a jab at a company that has been a huge advocate of Google: Mozilla. (Mozilla is the creator of the Firefox browser)

I'm using Firefox right now and right at the top right of my browser is a Google search. If I'm Mozilla I have to start questioning my relationship with Google considering the great real estate they own in my browser. If I'm Microsoft or Yahoo I'd be on the phone with someone over at Mozilla wondering how much it would cost me to take Google's spot and reminding them how Google has basically stuck it to them.

Sure, Microsoft has a browser too, but they were in the game before Firefox. The best chance really is for Yahoo who doesn't have a browser but does have a search engine.

Google joining the browser market in my opinion is actually good for Microsoft because the tech savvy users are going to adopt Chrome--the same people who use Firefox. The 80% who use Internet Explorer do so mostly because they don't even know about Firefox. Microsoft might still be at 80% a year from now with Firefox only owning 15% of the marketing and Google with 5%. Or some other variation. The funny thing is this reverses the roll of Google search verses Microsoft search. Microsoft should revel in their new found dominance of Google, but MS better get it right with IE8.