Digital Future May Be Just a Mirage 數(shù)字化未來(lái)或許只是海市蜃樓

譯/周宏韜

Conventional wisdomhas it that1 have it (that) 斷言；說(shuō)。newspapers are dying as the world busily converts to digital delivery of news, information and entertainment.

普遍看法是，世界忙著轉(zhuǎn)向以數(shù)字化方式發(fā)布新聞、信息和娛樂(lè)，報(bào)紙正隨之走向沒(méi)落。

[2]The week past has seen a number of markers on this journey.The news is grim and getting grimmer.

[2]上周見(jiàn)證了這一進(jìn)程的諸多征兆。有關(guān)消息越來(lái)越不樂(lè)觀。

But that’snot half of it2 not (the) half of僅是……的一小部分。.

然而，情況恐怕更加嚴(yán)重。

[3]Now it is emerging that the digital future so long foreseen by publishers may be nothing more than a shimmering mirage.

[3]出版界迄今為止所預(yù)測(cè)的數(shù)字化未來(lái)，可能不過(guò)是微光閃爍的海市蜃樓，這一點(diǎn)已初露端倪。

[4]Digital growth has stalled and anyway, the revenues it producesfall far short of3 fall short of 未達(dá)到（某目的）。filling the hole left by deserting print customers.

[4]數(shù)字化增長(zhǎng)已經(jīng)熄火，無(wú)論如何，它所產(chǎn)生的收益根本填補(bǔ)不了因拋棄印刷媒體客戶落下的虧空。

[5]TheFinancial Timesconducted a major analysis of print media in Britain last week and reported the gloomy facts—circulations halved in the past decade; advertising dollars down by a third in the past five years, taking about$900 million out of the market, $225m of which disappeared in 2015 alone.

[5]上周，《金融時(shí)報(bào)》針對(duì)英國(guó)印刷媒體做了認(rèn)真分析，并公布了其慘淡狀況——過(guò)去10年發(fā)行量減半；過(guò)去5年廣告收入下降三成，因此損失約9億美元市值，僅2015年就蒸發(fā)掉2.25億美元。

[6]There was a major casualty in Britain last week:The Independent4 英國(guó)《獨(dú)立報(bào)》。2016年3月20日，出版了最后一期紙媒報(bào)紙，此后只出網(wǎng)絡(luò)數(shù)字版。will close next month and its cut-price easy-read version,i, has been sold to a regional publisher wanting to give its local websites some national heft.

[6]上周英國(guó)損失重大：《獨(dú)立報(bào)》將于下月停刊，其姊妹報(bào)——便宜易讀的i已經(jīng)賣(mài)給了一家地區(qū)性出版商，他們想為地方性網(wǎng)站增添些許全國(guó)性色彩。

[7]The gloom—and the figures—is similar in the US and Australia.Bob Peters of Global Media Analysis combed the numbers from Seven West Media’s first-half financial performance and reported that over the past five years advertising revenue for its newspaper and magazine businesses (The West Australian,New Idea) has halved, total revenues were down by one-third and operating profits were down by about two-thirds.

[7]在美國(guó)和澳大利亞，經(jīng)營(yíng)狀況和財(cái)務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)同樣慘淡。環(huán)球媒體分析公司的鮑勃·彼得斯梳理了七西傳媒上半年財(cái)務(wù)業(yè)績(jī)的數(shù)據(jù)，發(fā)現(xiàn)過(guò)去五年，報(bào)紙和雜志業(yè)務(wù)（《西澳大利亞人報(bào)》、《新思潮》雜志）的廣告收入已減半，總收入也減少了三分之一，營(yíng)業(yè)利潤(rùn)則銳減約三分之二。

[8]Fairfax Media last week embarked on yet another round of cost-cutting in its third editorial restructure in half a decade.

[8]上周，費(fèi)爾法克斯傳媒又啟動(dòng)了新一輪成本削減，這是它五年內(nèi)第三次進(jìn)行編輯架構(gòu)的調(diào)整。

[9]Andrew Holden, the editor in chief ofThe Age, quit among rumours of a power shift towards Sydney—denied,as always, by chief executive Greg Hywood.

[9]《時(shí)代報(bào)》主編安德魯·霍爾登在編輯權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)交悉尼的傳言中離職——當(dāng)然，執(zhí)行總裁格雷格·海伍德照例對(duì)此予以否認(rèn)。

[10]It raises the question: other than continued cutting (which cannot go on because soon there will be nothing left to cut) what do Hywood and his silent chairman Nick Falloon have to offer to shareholders?

[10]由此引出了問(wèn)題：除了繼續(xù)削減（削減難以為繼，因?yàn)楹芸炀蜁?huì)減無(wú)可減），海伍德及對(duì)此保持沉默的主席尼克·法倫還有什么可奉獻(xiàn)給股東的呢？

Their credibility is inthe pits5 the pits 〈俚〉最糟糕的情況。, along with revenues.

除了收益，他們的信譽(yù)現(xiàn)在也糟糕透了。

[11]At first glance these figures and actions merely confirm what we have known foryonks6 yonks 〈口〉很久。—there’s a big shift in the way society works and gathers its information and the day will come when it is no longer viable to print newspapers.

[11]乍一看，這些數(shù)據(jù)和措施不過(guò)印證了我們?cè)缫阎赖臇|西——整個(gè)社會(huì)加工和獲取信息的方式發(fā)生了巨變，遲早有一天，印刷報(bào)紙?jiān)僖矡o(wú)法生存。

[12]But according to Michael Wolff,the US media guru writing inUSA Today, it’s worse than that.He reports theFTfindings and writes:“The effort to reinvent the business online—in themantra7 mantra 咒語(yǔ)，真言。of publishing, ‘digital is the future’—presents, if possible, an even bleaker picture.

[12]但據(jù)美國(guó)媒體權(quán)威邁克爾·沃爾夫在《今日美國(guó)》上的撰文，情況更加糟糕。他報(bào)告了《金融時(shí)報(bào)》的發(fā)現(xiàn)，并寫(xiě)道：“印刷媒體網(wǎng)絡(luò)化的改造——用出版業(yè)的真言說(shuō)，即‘?dāng)?shù)字化就是未來(lái)’——如果能實(shí)現(xiàn)，前景會(huì)更加黯淡。

[13]“In spite of the online world’scrowing about8 crow about 自鳴得意。advertising growth and the belief of many publishers that online ad revenue would surely replace offline,the per-view price of a digital ad continues to drop.”

[13]“線上媒體對(duì)其廣告增長(zhǎng)自鳴得意，許多出版商也深信線上廣告收入必將取代線下收入，盡管如此，數(shù)字廣告每次瀏覽的單價(jià)卻在持續(xù)下降。”

This is true.

實(shí)際就是如此。

[14]Five years ago, the print to digital conversion rate was set at 18c in the dollar—in other words, where print advertising generated $1, digital ads generated 18c.Today the figure is 13c and still going down.

[14]5年前，印刷對(duì)數(shù)字換算比率設(shè)定為1美元比18美分，換句話說(shuō)，印刷廣告創(chuàng)利1美元，則數(shù)字廣告創(chuàng)利18美分。今天，這個(gè)比率是1美元比13美分，而且還在持續(xù)下跌。

Soon the old cry of“print dollars equal digital dimes (10c)”will be true.

用不了多久，老口號(hào)“印刷媒體的美元等于數(shù)字媒體的角幣（10美分）”就會(huì)成為現(xiàn)實(shí)。

[15]But wait, there’s more.Consum- ers are rejecting the pact implicit in the print era—that the news they want will be placed between ads.

[15]但別急，還有更多問(wèn)題。消費(fèi)者現(xiàn)在拒絕印刷時(shí)代的潛規(guī)則——他們想看的新聞總被夾在廣告之間。

[16]The entire print model was built on two revenue streams—cover price9 cover price（書(shū)報(bào)雜志上的）標(biāo)價(jià)。and advertising, but this cannot be replicated online.

[16]整個(gè)印刷媒體的模式建立在兩項(xiàng)收益來(lái)源之上——按標(biāo)價(jià)的銷售收入和廣告收入，但這種模式無(wú)法在網(wǎng)上復(fù)制。

[17]Fewpay walls10 pay wall付費(fèi)墻，是對(duì)在線內(nèi)容實(shí)行付費(fèi)閱讀的模式，亦作paywall。are working and those that are do notfill the coffers11 fill the coffers 字面意思是“填滿金庫(kù)”或“滿足預(yù)算”，引申為“盈利”。.And now there are apps that work as digital ad blockers meaning that nobody ever has to see a digital ad again.

[17]付費(fèi)墻模式鮮有成效，在這一模式管用的地方，那些媒體也難以盈利。如今，有了能阻止數(shù)字廣告的應(yīng)用軟件，就意味著人們不必非得再看數(shù)字廣告了。

As a result, marketers see Google and Facebook as better buys than newspaper websites or their offshoots.

因此，營(yíng)銷人員認(rèn)為，與報(bào)紙網(wǎng)站或其分支相比，谷歌和臉書(shū)的性價(jià)比更高。

[18]And if that’s not enough to worry about there is evidence that digital growth is faltering, at least for some publications.

[18]如果這些還不足以讓人擔(dān)憂，那么，有證據(jù)表明，數(shù)字增長(zhǎng)已經(jīng)步履維艱，至少對(duì)某些出版物來(lái)說(shuō)是如此。

[19]This is seen here in the latest figures provided by the newspaper’s collective emma—Enhanced Media Metrics Australia—which shows a virtual flat line for theSydney Morning Heraldand losses forThe Age,Daily TelegraphandHerald Sun.The Australianand theAFRare up, along with theNew York Timesand theFT, confirming the longheld belief that demand for quality publications will be maintained longer than general-interest titles.

[19]這從報(bào)業(yè)集體調(diào)查公司emma（澳洲強(qiáng)化媒體測(cè)量）的最新數(shù)據(jù)中就可以看出，數(shù)據(jù)顯示：《悉尼先驅(qū)晨報(bào)》收支幾乎持平，而《時(shí)代報(bào)》《每日電訊報(bào)》和《先驅(qū)太陽(yáng)報(bào)》則收入下降。《澳大利亞人報(bào)》和《澳大利亞金融評(píng)論報(bào)》以及《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》和《金融時(shí)報(bào)》收入增長(zhǎng)，由此佐證了一個(gè)長(zhǎng)久以來(lái)的觀點(diǎn)，即對(duì)優(yōu)質(zhì)出版物的需求比對(duì)通俗出版物的需求更持久。

[20]The big question that arises from this round of global analysis is that, if we accept that the life of print is limited and digital conversion will struggle to support a sustainable journalistic model,what does the future hold?

[20]這輪全球分析引出了一個(gè)重要問(wèn)題：如果我們認(rèn)定印刷媒體終將消亡，而靠數(shù)字化轉(zhuǎn)型來(lái)維持可持續(xù)的新聞業(yè)務(wù)模式又步履維艱，那么未來(lái)靠什么呢？

[21]In my view, traditional media organisations need to forget about trying tobe all things to all people12 be all things to all people 試圖討好或適用于所有不同類型的人群（常常難以成功）。and focus on their specialties.

[21]依我看，傳統(tǒng)的媒體機(jī)構(gòu)沒(méi)必要再想著討好所有人，而應(yīng)當(dāng)突顯自身的特色。

The old bundling model with a bit of news, a bit of entertainment, a bit of sport, a bit of opinion and a bit for womendoesn’t cut it13 not cut it 不合格，難以勝任。anymore.

那種帶點(diǎn)新聞、加點(diǎn)娛樂(lè)、摻點(diǎn)體育、來(lái)點(diǎn)評(píng)論，再談點(diǎn)婦女的老舊雜燴模式怕是難以為繼了。

[22]Specialisation is even leading to new titles being tested—in Britain the Mirror group is to launch next month a cut-price (50c) short read, cheap and cheerful paper calledNew Day14 《新的一天》，于2016年2月29日創(chuàng)刊，發(fā)行9周后停刊。aimed at women.There’s also a paper aimed at interpreting the world for children.

[22]特色化甚至催生了正在試刊的新報(bào)——在英國(guó)，鏡報(bào)集團(tuán)下月即將為女性讀者推出一份低價(jià)（50美分）報(bào)紙，名為《新的一天》，以簡(jiǎn)短、價(jià)廉和明快見(jiàn)長(zhǎng)。還有一份旨在為孩子解讀世界的報(bào)紙計(jì)劃推出。

[23]These experiments may or may not work but in any event, they are not going to generate enough revenue to support traditional newsrooms of many hundreds of journalists.

[23]不管這些嘗試是否行得通，其帶來(lái)的收入都難以支撐擁有數(shù)百名記者的老式新聞編輯部。

I believe the future lies in transactional websites.

我認(rèn)為未來(lái)的出路在于交易型網(wǎng)站。

[24]TheLondon Sunis developing a betting business that, if successful, may be exported around the globe.

[24]《倫敦太陽(yáng)報(bào)》正在開(kāi)發(fā)一種博彩業(yè)務(wù)，一旦成功，可能會(huì)向全球推廣。

[25]The REA group, 61 per cent owned by News Corp Australia, has the lion’s share of the real estate market in Australia (in competition with Fairfax’s Domain) and is expanding offshore with businesses in the US, China, France,Germany and Italy.

[25]REA集團(tuán)61%的股份由澳大利亞新聞集團(tuán)所持有，在澳大利亞擁有最大的房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)份額（競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手是費(fèi)爾法克斯傳媒），現(xiàn)正向美國(guó)、中國(guó)、法國(guó)、德國(guó)和意大利擴(kuò)展境外業(yè)務(wù)。

[26]Real estate advertising used to be part of a newspaper’s bundle and, in some cases, a river of gold.

[26]房地產(chǎn)廣告過(guò)去曾經(jīng)是報(bào)紙捆綁廣告的一部分，某些情況下，簡(jiǎn)直就是搖錢(qián)樹(shù)。

[27]Maybe in the new digital world it will becomethe tail that wags the dog15 源自the tail wagging the dog 或it’s (a case of) the tail wagging the dog尾巴搖狗（意為次要部分支配或決定全局）。with its profits keeping newspapers alive.

[27]在數(shù)字化的新天地里，房地產(chǎn)廣告也許會(huì)喧賓奪主，其帶來(lái)的收益就能養(yǎng)活報(bào)紙。

But who knows?

不過(guò)，誰(shuí)知道呢？

It is, as ever, a work in progress.

革命尚未成功。