Newspaper circulation continues to decline in the U.S., according to a story in the New York Times. In the six-month period ended Sept. 30, average daily circulation for 770 newspapers fell 2.8%, while circulation for Sunday papers was down 3.4%. So where are all these newspaper subscribers going? Is it the Web that's capturing their attention or DVDs or iPods or their PVRs? An optimist will suggest many (some?) readers are going to newspaper Web sites rather than having the paper delivered. In theory, this means newspapers could generate more advertising revenue online. A pessimist will suggest newspaper readers are moving online (but perhaps not to newpaper sites) and dying off. Before anyone hits the panic button that newspapers are doomed (other than tree-loving environmentalists), the reality is newspapers are just being squeezed by a new medium - much like radio suffered but didn't disappear when TV appeared on the scene. The challenge for newspapers is adjusting their operating and economic models to account for more competition for the attention of advertisers and readers.
Update: Circulation among Canadian newspapers is also down, highlighted by major declines at the National Post.

There's a lot of excitement about Firefox 2.0 (although it seems muted compared with 1.5) but I have no plans to jump on the bandwagon quite yet despite the new version's better security and better speed. Why not? It mostly has to do with the compatibility of extensions. Why would I want to jump to 2.0 if some of my 1.5 extensions won't work? It would be like buying a new car with a better motor but the headlights and speedometer don't work. For now, I'll stick with 1.5. Who knows, I may even try IE7.
Update: Hardware 2.0's Adrian Kingley-Hughes has a post looking at 2.0's shortcomings, including memory leaks, weak anti-phishing features and incompatible extensions. He still believes 1.5 users should upgrade: "If you stick with 1.5.x then you're going to be at risk from unpatched vulnerabilities.  The only way to go is up to 2.0 and keep downloading updates as they become available."

The Report on Business magazine has an interesting profile on Telus CEO Darren Entwistle, which offers some insight into arguably Canada's most dynamic telecom executive. It includes the surprising contention the 44-year-old may have plans to walk away from telecom in four or five years to teach strategy and leadership at a U.K. university - as opposed to moving on to bigger and better things such as CEO of a U.S. RBOC. The only thing I would quibble about in the story is the claim Entwistle "blew some of his regained credibility with a doomed $1.1-billion bid for Microcell" in 2004. Everyone knew Entwistle wanted Microcell out of the wireless game because its discounting tactics were hurting the industry's operating margins. By making the bid, Entwistle put Microcell in play and Telus in a win-win position. If the bid succeeded, Telus would become an even bigger wireless player in a fast-growing market. If the bid failed (which happened when Ted Rogers made a $1.4-billion bid), the market would be consolidated and market conditions would improve. Entwistle didn't blow his credibility; he made a brilliant strategic move that didn't cost Telus a dime.

In Canada, the voter turnaround for municipal elections is appalling - usually less than 40% if you're lucky. There's been a lot of focus on whether online voting can convince more people to exercise their democratic right but the technology doesn't seem be ready for prime time. That said, there are a few signs the Web is becoming more of a political tool. One example is YouTube where a growing number of politicians are putting campaign videos to talk about their policy positions. The Toronto Star has a story how Mayor David Miller has posted a slickly-produced 95-second video to explain how he wants create more opportunities more young people "who face barriers caused by poverty, race and discrimination". (His rivals - Jane Pitfield and Stephen LeDrew also have videos on YouTube.) The key questions are whether these videos raise the profile of elections to affect turnout, and whether these clips resonate with young people, who are showing less faith in politicians and little interest in voting. I would argue technology is just one piece of the puzzle. As much as political YouTube videos are steps in the right direction, I'd be more encouraged to see politicians who are more honest, less interested in their re-elections prospects and more inspiring about making Toronto a better place to live. It would also be nice to see a candidate knock on my door once in a blue moon but I guess that's not likely to happen any time soon if YouTube is taking over that job.