Here's an interesting exercise - a graphic compiled by Will Sturgeon on The Media Blog - that attempts to show the changing audience for British national newspapers.
It combines ABC print sales figures (coloured grey) with ABCe online user figures (light blue) plus the numbers of social media fans and followers of named publication accounts (dark blue).
As Sturgeon readily concedes, it's only a snapshot. But it is revealing all the same. Note, for example, the Daily Mail's enormous reach in print and online compared to a relatively small social media (Facebook and Twitter) following.
The Guardian, by contrast, has almost as many social media fans and followers as it has daily visitors to its website. Its reach is, arguably, more penetrating.
So, says Sturgeon, compared to the Mail's runaway success The Guardian is "clearly growing a smaller but arguably more loyal, more engaged and more focussed community of online readers (even if we assume a high number of its social media followers are lapsed or rarely active)."
He goes on to draw a further important distinction. The Guardian's online content reflects the same values as those of its print newspaper while the Mail's online content "has changed the brand values its traditional readers would associate with the paper in order to court the pure numbers the media's evolution can deliver."
He is kind enough not to point to The Times's poor showing. Will its sister title, The Sun, really dare to go behind a paywall too?