In 1986 I left <em>The Times</em> to work on the launch of the <em>Independent. </em>I was gone by the following December, leaving to try to forge a writing career (it took another eight years before that really got off the ground).

The nine months or so I spent working on the launch of the <em>Indie</em> were fascinating and exhausting. Seven day weeks, fourteen hour days, mind-boggling changes of direction among those above, some of whom clearly knew even less about what they were doing than I did. Wouldn't have missed it for all the world but to be honest I was glad to get out. Launching a paper was a lot more fun than running the thing when it finally appeared.<!--more-->

Tomorrow the long-running saga of the <em>Independent</em> takes another turn. This was, remember, the first paper to be run by journalists, a bastion of free speech and independence in a media world dominated by evil conglomerates. Not that it lasted long like that. The thing struggled to be profitable, and what good fortune it had was soon scuppered by the ridiculous launch of a Sunday edition that has never really found its feet. Very soon both papers came to rely on a succession of owners to pay the bills. The latest is a former KGB agent. I wonder what people would have said if you'd mooted that as a possibility in 1986.

And tomorrow the Lebedev-run <em>Indie</em> launches a new venture -- <em>i. </em>Yes, that's all it's called. The ever-excellent Roy Greenslade gives us all a lowdown on what to expect <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/organgrinder/2010/oct/25/independent-i-simon-kelner" target="_blank">in the <em>Guardian</em> today</a>.

Here are a few tasters...
<ul>
	<li>It will be composed of all the stories that feature in the Independent, but heavily subbed down. In the so-called "news matrix", no story will be longer than 400 words, and most will be news-in-brief-style paragraphs.</li>
	<li>There will be just one comment article in the "opinion matrix", again taken from the main paper.</li>
	<li>There will be a news feature, some lifestyle content, a page of puzzles, a "business matrix" digest and a fair degree of sport.</li>
	<li>Ten new staff, including subs, have been hired to work on the paper.</li>
</ul>
Wow. A new newspaper and all it takes is ten new staff to rewrite existing copy from the <em>Independent</em> itself, now selling at full price around 88,000 copies. Some reports suggest that the company is expecting a sale of 400,000 for its new baby at 20p a shot. Yet it gets no TV advertising and the launch slogan -- 'i is, are you?' -- draws on the original launch line for the <em>Indie </em>itself. Yes, from 24 years ago. How many people outside luvvie media circles will understand that one?

In these difficult times you can only wish any media venture well. It must be horribly difficult being a journalist today, when budgets are continually squeezed and most reporters seem to be expected to do their jobs without ever leaving the office.

Does it stand a chance? I can't see it frankly. If I want a simple news digest I just turn on my phone. It's there in Google news, on the BBC, all over the place frankly. Bang up to date and free. Some observers think that the <em>Indie</em> <a href="http://www.newspaperinnovation.com/index.php/2010/10/19/independent-plans-well-copies-lite-version/" target="_blank">got its idea from a similar Portuguese startup also called </a><em><a href="http://www.newspaperinnovation.com/index.php/2010/10/19/independent-plans-well-copies-lite-version/" target="_blank">i</a>. </em>That now seems to be in big trouble, with a sale down to 15,000 against an initial forecast of 400,000.

The real question, though, is surely this: what does <em>i</em> mean for the <em>Independent</em> itself? If the little thing is simply a cannibalised digest of the big paper will some of the <em>Indie's</em> dwindling readership give up on that too? Isn't the real problem here the level of the <em>Indie's </em>sales? At one point after launch the paper had a circulation of around 400,000. Now it's down to disastrous levels.

Has Lebedev given up on turning round that catastrophic decline? If so what happens next if <em>i </em>bites the dust? The whole thing seems distinctly bizarre frankly. But then I've been out of newspapers for quite a while now. Perhaps I simply don't get it. And I may not be alone in that.

PS. On the subject of newspapers I'd be tempted to suggest that Lebedev would be better off apping up the existing <em>Indie</em> and turning it into a wonderful digital paper available for paid-for delivery to iPads, iPhones, Android devices, PCs and Macs. The <em>Times</em> app for the iPad looks wonderful in principle. I can't wait to read my edition on the train to London I'm about to catch.

Oh wait... Just tried to download it and it says...

<a href="http://davidhewson.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/rimg0085.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-6073" title="Exif_JPEG_PICTURE" src="http://davidhewson.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/rimg0085.jpg" alt="" width="490" height="367" /></a>

PS. It now works...