They say worldwide ad spending will fall 6.9%, and 8.7% both in the UK and US. Online advertising expenditure will rise, but only by 8.6% compared with the 20% it rose last year; in the UK, online is set to rise by just 2.3%. Meanwhile print ad spending is set to fall 12%. My GCSE in Maths tells me that there’s some kind of shortfall here. 

It’s the kind of environment that’ll see even big media players burn through cash while they come up with new ways of making or saving money; “A number of internet companies that have based their business model on advertising may find their model unsustainable now that credit is drying up”, says the author of the report. But all’s not lost for advertising – Zenith forecasts a bottom to the market this year before a return to overall growth by 2010.

They’re the latest in a series of groups peering into tea leaves and finding them forming the likeness of a crying advertising salesman. Carat published its figures a fortnight ago, telling of a 5.8% global decline; only China was predicted to see their market grow. Group M meanwhile predict a 4.4% drop, and said the US would continue to decline through 2010. They also predicted an 11% drop across UK media. Veronis Suhler Stevenson meanwhile predict a 7.4% decline in US advertising spending.

To try and fight these numbers, the LA Times (who have had some pretty massive problems recently) sold their soul last week for a few advertising clams from NBC – they ran an ad for the TV network on their front page masquerading as a real news story. And in the Sunday paper, they published an advertorial piece about forthcoming Paramount film The Soloist that looked just like a real feature in the arts section. Now their executive editor is calling them “horrible” and “a mistake” – they certainly are, when you’re trying to get new readers to fall in love with your brand and they can’t tell where the LA Times ends and the advertising begins. The public is equipped with a new generation of handheld devices to be eyeballed, so developing smartphone-specific content with astute ads to match is surely the next challenge. Advertising will be profitable again, but prosaic, deceptive methods will mean there won’t be anything left to make profits for.

The service is known as an API and is common to sites like Google – basically it’s a tailor-made content interface, a rare and ambitious step in the media industry. The Guardian hope to eventually create an ad-network, using their acculmulated intelligence to be reach more eyeballs than the visibility and diversity of news-site would allow. Like all games, more eyeballs mean greater profit.

One half of Open Platform is dubbed Content API, allowing developers access to a vast array of archives, which would permit, for example, the free use of Guardian articles about relevant artist on a museum’s webpages. In addition they offer Datastore, a “collection of important and high quality data sets curated by Guardian journalists.”

It’s not all puppy dogs, confetti, and the beginning of web utopia. Eventually, commercial use of service with be served alongside adverts. The Guardian aren’t purely in it for profit; their composition assures that they don’t intend to seek profit for shareholders benefit. Instead, their motivation is independence and conformity to their trust’s founding values. They can afford to be innovative and take risks in order to lead the way: being courageous, as their values state, is important. Indeed, shareholders “would normally have a heart attack at such a move.”

The New York Times and LA Times have both been flirting with billionaires recently, as they fight for survival; the NYT have had to sell off and lease back parts of their headquarters, landing themselves with a $24m annual rent payment as they try to pay back their Carlos Slim loan. The LA Times may have the best deal, with their potential suitor pointing to the Guardian as an ideal model. “Newspapers ought to be owned by foundations, not look for great financial returns” suggested philanthropist Eli Broad.

This API sees the Guardian setting the pace ahead of competitors like the New York Times who launched a similar but more restrictive service recently, featuring – wow! -a search facility and access to live headlines. The Guardian’s model is different, focused on allowing commercial use of their content and data. The result may be a smart mash-up of data and content, much Guardian branding, and a new revenue streams from which the same water can be continually recycled, reused, and resold.

If content is king, then this is service is a hundred of the king’s best horses, and thousands of his best messengers, sending the Guardian far and wide. A misstep online is unlikely to cost the Guardian much, and should only encourage competitors innovation—the industry sure needs it. With this move, the Guardian redraw of where the boundaries of the newspaper industry lie, using to technology to reach as far as possible. It’s enough to make Conrad Black spit his prison breakfast all over his email-inbox. He would be right to be worried, though he may have to wait until his release in a few years time to see the Guardian’s plans for complete media-domination realised.