I could hardly believe it when I saw The Washington Post’s new average daily paid circulation figure that made the rounds in recent days — a number so low that I first thought it must surely be missing a digit.

97,000.

That figure comes via the Alliance for Audited Media, and it reveals that The Washington Post’s average paid daily circulation has dropped below 100,000 for the first time in 55 years. To put that in perspective: 97,000 is the sort of figure you’d expect to see from a mid-size regional paper like The Minnesota Star Tribune or The Seattle Times. Not from a globally recognized newsroom with a billionaire owner and multiple Pulitzers to its name.

The Washington Post’s vanishing readership

Well, who cares about print anymore anyway, you might think. But there’s a difference between being the most important thing – and simply being important. Print falls in the latter category, because not only does the physical version of a newspaper or magazine still brings in revenue – an outlet’s circulation is also a kind of proxy metric that reflects the strength of a media brand’s connection to its audience.

Five years ago, the Post was selling 250,000 papers a day. On Sundays, it now barely crosses 160,000 (both numbers, again, from the Alliance for Audited Media data). Those numbers suggests that, at a time when trust and relevance are more important than ever for media institutions, the Jeff Bezos-owned newspaper seemingly comes up short on both counts – based on the declining number of readers who are willing to pay for it.

What’s more, the timing of this latest data coincides with a new bout of contraction: The Post is also eliminating its Metro section, folding local news coverage into a hybrid that combines Metro, Sports, and Style.

You don’t need a memo to understand what’s happening here.

The Post is shrinking, both physically and in terms of its relevance. Once a D.C. powerhouse with national ambition, it’s now in retreat, dealing with a collapse in readership and constant editorial instability. You could also argue there’s something of a disconnect that remains between the paper’s mission and its audience. As one reader wrote on X, “Local coverage of Virginia is a joke, and Politico, Axios and others eat their lunch” on Capitol Hill reporting. Another noted that the Post tried to become a national rival to The New York Times and failed — abandoning its identity as a regional and D.C. insider paper in the process.

One theory worth considering: The problem may very well be baked into the newspaper’s brand itself.

For all its Pulitzer-winning political journalism and ambitious national coverage, The Washington Post still carries the weight and limitations of, well, its name. My suspicion is that, because of its name, it probably remains too closely associated with Beltway politics, federal institutions, and D.C. power players. That makes it an obvious read for lawmakers and lobbyists, but a tougher sell for someone in, say, Des Moines.

The New York Times has certainly rebranded itself as a national lifestyle enterprise, with features like games and cooking-related content that augment its journalism. But while New York is a hub for media, entertainment, politics, and business, Washington D.C. is kind of a one-note town.

Making matters worse, the Post has been hemorrhaging top talent in recent months, including Metro veterans and key editors. It’s also dealing with sagging newsroom morale and tension surrounding Bezos’s editorial direction. Long story short: The paper is facing a reader crisis, a branding problem, and a leadership challenge all at once. It’s hard to see how the Post pulls itself out of this nosedive – and the circulation numbers suggest it’s running out of time.