I liked Daniel Gross's explanation of why network newscasts aren't dead yet, but like many a counterintuitive arguer, he goes a bit too far:

The fragmentation also works in favor of another declining medium consumed primarily by old people: newspapers. If you're a Washington-area sporting-goods chain and you want several hundred thousand people to learn about a sale, the Washington Post (published by Slate's parent company) is the only vehicle that can guarantee delivery. Yes, newspaper-ad sales are drifting. But they're still significant. As the Washington Post Co.'s most recent earnings release shows, ad revenues at the Post fell 2 percent in the second quarter, while revenues at the online units, of which Slate is now a part, grew 21 percent. But look at the overall numbers. Print-ad revenues were $146.4 million, while online revenues were $18.7 million. It will take many more years of 2 percent declines for newspaper advertising and 20 percent growth in online advertising before the newspaper business model becomes seriously endangered.

By my calculations, if print revenue declines two percent a year every year from a base of $146.4 million and online revenue grows 20 percent a year from a base of $18.7 million, then in 2016 online will be earning $138.94
million while print will be earning just $117.23 -- and 2016 isn't really all that far off. On top of which, the costs involved in running a print publication (paper, ink, etc.) are way higher than for online. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine that online ad revenues will really continue growing at such a rapid clip indefinitely, so the point is a bit moot.