Celebrity gossip is fungible. E.g., suppose I cared about the gory details of the Cruise/Holmes divorce. A quick search tells me there are almost 2600 articles on Google News for "TomKat". Clearly there is very little incentive to buy a local newspaper when so much information is available for free from so many different suppliers online.
Anecdotally, I live in Melbourne and get a weekly local newspaper, but I don't pay for it since it comes with a bundle of advertising flyers. We sometimes glance through the newspaper, but I wouldn't be willing to pay for it. I'll wager that given the choice, most people would rather ditch the newspaper and keep the flyers.
FWIW the future of journalism will probably increasingly look like http://www.dailymail.co.uk/. It's trivia and gossip mainlined straight to the optic nerve. Addictive and profitable? Sure. "Great journalism"? No.
Anecdotally, I live in Melbourne and get a weekly local newspaper, but I don't pay for it since it comes with a bundle of advertising flyers. We sometimes glance through the newspaper, but I wouldn't be willing to pay for it. I'll wager that given the choice, most people would rather ditch the newspaper and keep the flyers.
FWIW the future of journalism will probably increasingly look like http://www.dailymail.co.uk/. It's trivia and gossip mainlined straight to the optic nerve. Addictive and profitable? Sure. "Great journalism"? No.