If I had a newspaper, my website would be a blog. And since some people still like to get the printed word, my printed paper would be generated from the blog at a certain time and then go to the presses. If I had a magazine, it would be the same - just that it gets printed once a month.

I would probably have more content, and more interaction with my readers. This would mean a shift in the way the authors work, but it would also enrich my publication and probably make it more objective.

My publication would attract more readers from all over the world, and different types of advertisers. There would be advertising on the site, related to the articles it surrounds where possible. My advertisers could better track the results of their advertising, and since the ads are better target, they would achieve better results.

If I had a certain size of online readership, I could even consider charging for subscriptions to some of the sections of the site.

But then again, if I was a publisher of a newspaper or a magazine I would probably not be able to relate to any of this. I might be out of business before putting any of this into action, but in any case it will take me years to realize that I should focus on the online presence of my paper.

If I ran a radio station, my website would have a blog. I would offer PodCasts of my shows. I would offer songs for download against a small fee.

If I ran a TV station, my website would have a blog. Where legally possible I would offer VideoCasts of my shows. Where possible I would charge a small fee for those downloads.

(This is something I have thought about before, but this specific post was inspired by Bucko. Thanks!)