E-readers are supposed to be the devices that save newspaper companies from sure ruin. Users will flock to these new tablet-sized readers, allowing media companies to shed expensive distribution and printing costs while gaining new, savvy users who will bring in subscription revenue. Advertisers will love the readers, too, and shower newspapers with even more revenue.
That’s one view of e-readers. There’s another view from bloggers and columnists who trash e-readers. There’s no way they’ll help the industry, they claim. How many electronic devices do people need, and why would they pay for an e-reader when they can get a lightweight netbook or inexpensive PC with more functions?

Third argument
I think there’s a third argument, the one I often make: E-readers will be a part of a multiplatform strategy that will keep newspapers healthy for years to come.
Media companies will shortly have four platforms for information delivery — print newspapers, online, mobile, and e-readers.
Each of those platforms should deliver information in different ways.
Here’s how:
•Newspapers could be the device that provides longer, more explanatory pieces, comics, crosswords, display ads, inserts and coupons.
•Online may present breaking news only, comprised of short bits of information that pushes users to a subscription product.
•Mobile could offer easy-to-access snippets of information across a few, select categories: local weather forecasts, sports scores, stock prices, breaking news alerts.
•E-readers could serve as the updateable newspaper, providing users with continually refreshed newspaper content throughout the day. Unlike online and mobile, both the printed product and e-readers would provide in-depth information that users pay for.

Basic premise
Now, you can quibble about what platform provides what information, and whether a media company can make enough money with a multiplatform model. But I think the basic premise is solid: Newspapers have to find ways to take advantage of the delivery systems available to them and squeeze as much revenue as possible out of those systems.
Indeed, some newspapers are starting to think about hybrid subscription models in which their customers pay one price for access to all of their platforms.
Now comes debate centering about whether e-readers will “save” newspapers.
Of course they won’t. There’s no silver bullet that warrants newspapers staking a claim in a single information delivery platform. Instead of focusing on whether one thing will work, newspapers should focus on how they can best take advantage of all of the weapons in their arsenal.
E-readers are just a part of that toolset. Media companies will decide whether the Kindle DX, Plastic Logic, First Paper, I-Rex, Bridgestone or Fujitsu are right for them. But even before they pick one, they need to develop a multiplatform strategy to deliver their information.
There was a lot of talk about such a strategy at last month’s Digital Publishing Alliance meeting. There’s no doubt that many are thinking about it. But thinking about it and putting it into operation are two very different things.
Without a doubt, e-readers are coming to market faster than anticipated. Kindle, I-Rex and the full-color Fujitsu Flepia are already available. The DX will be released later this year and Plastic Logic promises to be out in January 2010. There will be others out before then.
The industry is doing the right thing in aggressively exploring e-readers, their business models, and determining what can work best for them. While newspapers are doing that, they also need to ensure their multiplatform delivery strategy is in place — whatever form it might take.

Ray Marcano is a long-time journalist and digital media professional. For additional news and opinion, visit Marcano’s blog at  <http://www.raymarcano.com/> www.raymarcano.com.