how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2012-09-27 09:11:09: Like the recording industry, the newspaper industry has struggled to adapt to the new broadband age, and spends more than a little time blaming everyone other than themselves for the latency. ..
|
 | | Trees want tax on pulp mills, axes, saws, stump grinders, shipping, ...
Yeah... you should pay for my mistkaes...
--
Splat | |
| Reviews:
 ·Charter
1 edit | An alternative... The Times-Picayune (New Orleans' own newspaper) has a different idea. Since sales of papers are down and have been for years, they are switching their model. Beginning in October, the paper will actually be printed three times a week instead of seven, and they will begin to focus more on their online edition.
Of course, once they do this, they will expect us to pay for their online content...but they're surprisingly mum about this so far.
The real issue here is that people have so many choices for immediate news now (many that are free of charge) that it makes less and less sense for customers to continue purchasing a newspaper -- with stories already a day old. | |
| |  exocet_cmI am the law - Judge DreddPremium
join:2003-03-23
New Orleans, LA
kudos:2 | Re: An alternative... said by ccureau:The Times-Picayune (New Orleans' own newspaper) has a different idea. Since sales of papers are down and have been for years, they are switching their model. Beginning in October, the paper will actually be printed three times a week instead of seven, and they will begin to focus more on their online edition.
Of course, once they do this, they will expect us to pay for their online content...but they're surprisingly mum about this so far.
The real issue here is that people have so many choices for immediate news now (many that are free of charge) that it makes less and less sense for customers to continue purchasing a newspaper -- with stories already a day old.
It will be interesting to see how this goes. There are already billboards popping up down the street near the superdome that says
"N_w Orlea_s des_r_es a 5 d_y a week n_ws paper"
"Missing some of the story?"
And then it talks about another newspaper or media group.
--
"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons..." - T.S Eliot
"I have often regretted my speech, never my silence." - Publilius Syrus
Ma blog: »www.johndball.com | |
| | | Reviews:
·Charter
| Re: An alternative... said by exocet_cm:It will be interesting to see how this goes. There are already billboards popping up down the street near the superdome that says
"N_w Orlea_s des_r_es a 5 d_y a week n_ws paper"
"Missing some of the story?"
And then it talks about another newspaper or media group.
The Advocate (Baton Rouge paper) has been saying its going to put out a New Orleans paper too now...I saw the little paper wedged in the fence yesterday. It was no more than a one-section deal, but it did sport a little sticker saying "Have this paper on us!" | |
| | | | exocet_cmI am the law - Judge DreddPremium
join:2003-03-23
New Orleans, LA
kudos:2 | Re: An alternative... said by ccureau:said by exocet_cm:It will be interesting to see how this goes. There are already billboards popping up down the street near the superdome that says
"N_w Orlea_s des_r_es a 5 d_y a week n_ws paper"
"Missing some of the story?"
And then it talks about another newspaper or media group.
The Advocate (Baton Rouge paper) has been saying its going to put out a New Orleans paper too now...I saw the little paper wedged in the fence yesterday. It was no more than a one-section deal, but it did sport a little sticker saying "Have this paper on us!" As long as they get off our (NOPD's) back I'm for any alternative paper.
--
"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons..." - T.S Eliot
"I have often regretted my speech, never my silence." - Publilius Syrus
Ma blog: »www.johndball.com | |
|
| | | The Post Standard (Syracuse NY only newspaper) is doing the exact same thing starting Jan. 2013
--
| |
| | |  stevek1949We're not in Kansas anymore
join:2002-11-13
Virginia Beach, VA | Re: An alternative... Until broadband is labeled as a utility, it is a private connection/contract between a user and an ISP. Adding taxes to it is just away to get people to pay for another private enterprise, the newspaper. If it goes through, it won't be the last.
If I do not want to buy a brand of beer, I do not pay an added fee to whatever brand that I buy. If I do not want to pay for a newspapaer, I don't buy it and I don't expect to be backdoor billed for their content. Nobody says that they can't charge a fee for content on the interwebs. I just won't pay for it. My choice.
There are two newspapers in my area, the Virginian Pilot and the Daily Press. One charges a fee for on line content, one doesn't. Guess which one I use? Once again, their choice and my choice.
Anyone can do whatever they please, but they have to also take the consequences of their actions.
Nobody is in business to lose money. I understand that. But when the product is perceived to be worth less than the cost, the usage wanes. It is not my responsibility to make sure that everyone makes money. It is my responsibility that I spend my money wisely. | |
|
| | | said by ccureau:The Times-Picayune (New Orleans' own newspaper) has a different idea. Since sales of papers are down and have been for years, they are switching their model. Beginning in October, the paper will actually be printed three times a week instead of seven, and they will begin to focus more on their online edition.
Of course, once they do this, they will expect us to pay for their online content...but they're surprisingly mum about this so far.
The real issue here is that people have so many choices for immediate news now (many that are free of charge) that it makes less and less sense for customers to continue purchasing a newspaper -- with stories already a day old.
The problem is, despite their overhead being now much less due to not having to print nor distribute that physical newspaper copy, they still try to charge prices very similar to those physical newspaper prices and wonder why nobody subscribes. | |
| |  Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | I have a friend in the paper business.
The cost of the daily paper just covers the printing and delivery.
All the newspaper profits and salaries come from advertisements.
This is why a newspaper can switch to online only and not miss the subscription fees. A server is alot cheaper than running printers.
They need to find a way to capitalize on online advertisements to cover reporters salaries. Advertising is the most important department to a newspaper. | |
| | | Reviews:
·Optimum Online
 ·Callcentric
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: An alternative... said by Oh_No:I have a friend in the paper business.
The cost of the daily paper just covers the printing and delivery.
All the newspaper profits and salaries come from advertisements.
This is why a newspaper can switch to online only and not miss the subscription fees. A server is alot cheaper than running printers.
They need to find a way to capitalize on online advertisements to cover reporters salaries. Advertising is the most important department to a newspaper.
The only problem is that as far as I know online advertisement pays much less than ads in paper version. | |
|
| westdc
join:2009-01-25
Amissville, VA
kudos:1 | Maybe The Buggy whip markers should have tried that and they would still be in business today! | |
| | | | said by ccureau:The Times-Picayune (New Orleans' own newspaper) has a different idea. Since sales of papers are down and have been for years, they are switching their model. Beginning in October, the paper will actually be printed three times a week instead of seven, and they will begin to focus more on their online edition.
Of course, once they do this, they will expect us to pay for their online content...but they're surprisingly mum about this so far.
The real issue here is that people have so many choices for immediate news now (many that are free of charge) that it makes less and less sense for customers to continue purchasing a newspaper -- with stories already a day old.
Lousy little newspaper here has already been doing this 3 times a week thing for quite some time now.
Newspapers are ancient history. I don't know a soul who still gets it delivered.
To think they can just collect from anyone/everyone sounds even crazier than the crap the RIAA/MPAA is trying to pull!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
|
| |  I want I want I want
| |
| | | | | | Re: Quality said by J E F F:Make sure to check spelling and grammar. And when you make a correction the next day, don't be so vague on which your are apologizing for. So...
Which newspaper do you work for?
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... | |
| | |  J E F FWhatta Ya Think About Dat?Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
 ·Rogers Portable ..
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·magicjack.com
| Re: Quality said by CrazyFingers:said by J E F F:Make sure to check spelling and grammar. And when you make a correction the next day, don't be so vague on which your are apologizing for. So... Which newspaper do you work for? At least you got it...and that is the tpye of quality we get in hour paper every day.
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein | |
|
| | My plan to make money This sounds like a great idea, so I think I'll adapt it a little. First, I'm going to find out what companies were big in the carriage-building business before cars came on the scene. Next, I'm going to buy whatever remnants of one of them that I can find, then I'm going to demand that car manufacturers pay my company a small fee for each vehicle they sell, since these newfangled automobiles have decimated my business. I'll even be nice and not demand retroactive fees for lost business during the last 80 years or so.
Sounds fair to me. | |
| | | | Re: My plan to make money I think that would be the Selden Patent. | |
|
1 edit | Another idea... I would like to see another broadband tax to help support the mechanical typewriter and wall-mount rotary telephone industries.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own." | |
|  drewAutomaticPremium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
kudos:6 |  Business Plan
Here's where I see "we" are at:
•Hardly anyone under the age of about 40 (no source for this number, just anecdotal experience) wants to buy a newspaper in favor of online news.
•Virtually no one will pay for a subscription to an online news source. Some places have semi-paywalls, however people just look for alternative sources of the same information.
•Most people hate online advertisements - whether they are pop-ups, banner ads, click-through-to-see-content, whatever.
•Technologies like AdBlock work very well and are seeing wider use as more people switch to IE-alternative browsers.
Now for my question... how does everyone propose that reporters get paid? You and I don't want to pay for it. The for-profit companies aren't interested in being unprofitable...
What's the plan here? Something's gotta give, right?
--
flickr | 'Cause I've been waiting, all my life just waiting
For you to shine, shine your light on me | |
| | | | Re: Business Plan Who cares what their business plan is. It's not the job of someone else to come up with a business plan for a business they don't own LOL.
Nothing has "got to give." If no one wants the product newspapers are selling, then the reporters better find a new career. | |
| | | drewAutomaticPremium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
kudos:6 | Re: Business Plan said by ericthered26:Nothing has "got to give." If no one wants the product newspapers are selling, then the reporters better find a new career. So you're saying that you'd welcome the "death" of written journalism?
--
flickr | 'Cause I've been waiting, all my life just waiting
For you to shine, shine your light on me | |
| | | | kxrm
join:2002-07-18
Fort Worth, TX | Re: Business Plan said by drew:said by ericthered26:Nothing has "got to give." If no one wants the product newspapers are selling, then the reporters better find a new career. So you're saying that you'd welcome the "death" of written journalism? I don't think that is what he is saying, what he is saying is he welcomes the death of the current business models of written journalism. Eventually as people leave and an industry evaporates it will meet the supply needs of the current demand. There really is a lot of options for journalism now and therefore supply has breached demand.
We will never live in a world without journalism, but we can live in a world without large conglomerates and incumbent business models running journalism. | |
| | | |  djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1
·VOIPo
·Verizon Wireless..
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by drew:said by ericthered26:Nothing has "got to give." If no one wants the product newspapers are selling, then the reporters better find a new career. So you're saying that you'd welcome the "death" of written journalism? That's not the question. Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for something that people clearly don't feel is worth paying a small subscription fee for?
In the modern age of tablets and smartphones, the likelihood of "written journalism" dying out altogether is extremely low. If reporters are writing something truly compelling, people will buy a digital subscription for their Kindle/iPad/etc. They can also make money from ad revenue. If their product can't stand up to what the web generates for free, then yes, it should die.
They're seriously trying to argue that ad blocking is preventing them from being able to earn money from a website?
--
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
Rethink Billable.
| |
| | | | | | | Re: Business Plan said by djrobx:They're seriously trying to argue that ad blocking is preventing them from being able to earn money from a website?
it's pretty straight forward.
if your only source of revenue is from ad-space next to your content, and you're only paid for tracked views, or clicks on those ads, then anyone using software like ad-blocker is denying you revenue.
so, serious question: if pay-walls are not cool, and blocking ads is the default, how do they get paid at all? | |
|
| | | | | Unfortunately, We've already seen that... The quality of writing as of late is hardly "journalism"; yes, it's written, but that's about all I can say about it. | |
|
|  ImmerGentlemanPremium
join:2010-01-07
Evans, GA
kudos:6
·Comcast
| I think the first thing that needs to be addressed is the profession of journalism. Something needs to change. It used to be about getting the story out first (breaking the news coverage), and then "asking the tough questions". With the advent of the blogosphere, reporters cannot be the first to break the news story, so they run with whatever is going viral and try to be the first to either "ask the tough question" or "sensationalize it into entertainment". I'd like to see the profession of journalism step back from being the "first to break the news" and return to fact-checking and closing up the headlines and viral videos.
The news media could do with more analysts and fewer "reporters" in my opinion, especially given the mass group-think that goes on. The network that can provide the most complete picture of "what is going on" will be top dog... the rest will be regarded as equal to tabloid media operations. I'd pay a monthly fee for credible analysis... but the industry hasn't demonstrated proficiency in this regard yet.
As this money dries up, we'll see more polarization of media outlets as each seeks political favor in hopes of a guaranteed bottom line. This country is extremely paparazzi friendly, so we might also see that cancer experience some rapid growth.
--
Guild leader of Pride and Ego
Immergruen (resto/boomie) on Nathrezim Server (US)
Malanorei (discipline/holy); Esclavizado (blood/unholy)
Intelligence is no substitute for Character. | |
| | | drewAutomaticPremium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
kudos:6 | Re: Business Plan said by Immer:I'd like to see the profession of journalism step back from being the "first to break the news" and return to fact-checking and closing up the headlines and viral videos.
*snip*
The news media could do with more analysts and fewer "reporters" in my opinion, especially given the mass group-think that goes on. *snip* I'd pay a monthly fee for credible analysis... but the industry hasn't demonstrated proficiency in this regard yet.
You value fact-checking. I'd wager that the large majority in this nation does not. Niche markets survive, but typically not at the level of, say the WSJ or NYT.
Someone will have to be the *first* to do this. They have to convince some investors that it's a good idea and I'm not sure we're there yet.
--
flickr | 'Cause I've been waiting, all my life just waiting
For you to shine, shine your light on me | |
|
|  kpfx
join:2005-10-28
San Antonio, TX | said by drew:Most people hate online advertisements - whether they are pop-ups, banner ads, click-through-to-see-content, whatever. Yes, people hate advertisements, but people also tolerate them (up to a certain degree). The advertising model has worked for television and online news sources for many years.
said by drew:Virtually no one will pay for a subscription to an online news source. Some places have semi-paywalls, however people just look for alternative sources of the same information. But people will pay for a subscription service if there is valuable content that you can't get elsewhere. Nobody will pay a subscription nowadays for a local newspaper that just reprints AP/Reuters articles and writes about a dozen local fluff pieces (which is what a majority of them do). However, news services such as the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are profitable because they actually have some quality research and reporting going into their content.
said by drew:Now for my question... how does everyone propose that reporters get paid? You and I don't want to pay for it. The for-profit companies aren't interested in being unprofitable...
What's the plan here? Something's gotta give, right? There's no reason the news industry can't survive on advertising and specialty subscription models (i.e. WSJ).
Gone is the old pre-internet newspaper model where a local shop would just put together AP/Reuters articles, write a dozen local articles pulled from the daily police report, cram it with ads and push it out the door for $1.50 each.
The "news" market will not disappear. What we're simply seeing is a local/regional print market that is over-saturated with suppliers when compared with the number of advertisers the market can support. We're already past the days when every city had two or three newspapers each, the trend just needs to continue until it finds balance. That's how free market works. | |
| | | drewAutomaticPremium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
kudos:6 | Re: Business Plan said by kpfx:said by drew:Most people hate online advertisements - whether they are pop-ups, banner ads, click-through-to-see-content, whatever. Yes, people hate advertisements, but people also tolerate them (up to a certain degree). The advertising model has worked for television and online news sources for many years. Television viewers have zero choice in the matter - you either watch the broadcast later after recording it and fast-forwarding through commercials OR watch it live and deal with the commercials. Captive audience!
People "tolerate" online news advertisements - but my feeling is that people are tolerating them less and less. Thus the proliferation of AdBlock et al.
said by kpfx:said by drew:Virtually no one will pay for a subscription to an online news source. Some places have semi-paywalls, however people just look for alternative sources of the same information. But people will pay for a subscription service if there is valuable content that you can't get elsewhere. Nobody will pay a subscription nowadays for a local newspapers that just reprints AP/Reuters articles and writes about a dozen local fluff pieces (which is what a majority of them do). However, news services such as the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are profitable because they actually have some quality research and reporting going into their content. I know of no one that pays for an online-only subscription to any news source. This includes executive professionals and non-tech savvy folks. I'm not saying that no one does it, but I don't think it's gone that well for anyone. People will pay for the WSJ, but they're typically getting the print edition with the online as a bonus, or is that incorrect?
said by kpfx:said by drew:Now for my question... how does everyone propose that reporters get paid? You and I don't want to pay for it. The for-profit companies aren't interested in being unprofitable...
What's the plan here? Something's gotta give, right? There's no reason the news industry can't survive on advertising and specialty subscription models (i.e. WSJ). Gone is the old pre-internet newspaper model where a local shop would just put together AP/Reuters articles, write a dozen local articles pulled from the daily police report, cram it with ads and push it out the door for $1.50 each. The "news" market will not disappear. What we're simply seeing is a local/regional print market that is over-saturated with suppliers when compared with the number of advertisers the market can support. We're already past the days when every city had two or three newspapers each, the trend just needs to continue until it finds balance. That's how free market works. I have no issue with the "death" of local newspapers... they're almost completely useless, at least around here. However, where will the big guys find their reporting staff when their senior folks retire? People have to "cut their teeth" somewhere, right?
I still don't see forced advertisement online and/or paywalls as a viable source of profit for many news agencies.
--
flickr | 'Cause I've been waiting, all my life just waiting
For you to shine, shine your light on me | |
| | | | KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: Business Plan said by drew:Yes, people hate advertisements, but people also tolerate them (up to a certain degree). The advertising model has worked for television and online news sources for many years.
I think the lack of QC from ad vendors really helped drive this, Adblock is now seen as not just a tool to stop those annoy rich media ads that mixed at double volume just like their TV counterparts. But it is seen as a security tool because ad vendors who are the ones that actually supply them have allowed people to push malware via ads(ie "Your computer is infected, click here to clean up now") that popup ad alone has caused many hours of tech support.
After dealing with that when I worked in tech support, after helping someone clean their PC I always directed them to Firefox and Adblock Plus.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | | | | | Re: Business Plan said by Kearnstd:I think the lack of QC from ad vendors really helped drive this, Adblock is now seen as not just a tool to stop those annoy rich media ads that mixed at double volume just like their TV counterparts. But it is seen as a security tool because ad vendors who are the ones that actually supply them have allowed people to push malware via ads(ie "Your computer is infected, click here to clean up now") that popup ad alone has caused many hours of tech support.
After dealing with that when I worked in tech support, after helping someone clean their PC I always directed them to Firefox and Adblock Plus.
DING DING DING!!!! WE HAVE A WINNAR!!!!!
Ad servers rarely check their ads and when it does infect a system, they turn a blind eye to it. That is the reason Ad Block is so valuable. | |
|
| | zefie
join:2007-07-18
Hudson, NY Reviews:
 ·DSL EXTREME
·Verizon Online DSL
| Online ads would be tolerable if they were still small text or gif ads, and just 1 or 2.
Some small guys still do this but unfortunately their ads get blocked when someone installs adblock to block the 3, 4, 5... 20 flash/audio/video ads all over the place on some of the major sites with no respect for the internet. They are ugly, and slow down (and sometimes crash) users' browsers. Not to mention some of them even go as far as installing viruses into users' computers (for IE users.)
The problem gets accelerated by the new caps being introduced by ISPs. People don't want 30mB audio/video ads eating their already limited monthly bandwidth allocation. | |
|
| | | What reporters? Almost everything that appears is just propaganda written by corporations or the government. Asking us to pay twice for this is obscene. The real news is revealed by unpaid sources, and in age of the internet it's much more efficient and safe to self-publish on Wikileaks. | |
| |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by drew:Now for my question... how does everyone propose that reporters get paid? You and I don't want to pay for it. The for-profit companies aren't interested in being unprofitable...
We get a weekly newspaper (the Gazette (MD)) that is paid for by advertising and has plenty of local news stories. I pay nothing for it, and they seem to be doing OK.
--
Romney/Ryan 2012 - Put a couple of mature adults in charge. | |
| |  ArchivisYour DaddyPremium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
kudos:18 | said by drew:Now for my question... how does everyone propose that reporters get paid? You and I don't want to pay for it. The for-profit companies aren't interested in being unprofitable...
What's the plan here? Something's gotta give, right?
Why do reporters need to get paid? Why do we need to maintain the same volume of reporters and the same evolution of reporters? You've also made some assumptions here that need to be questioned. Are all news sources unprofitable? Is it possible that news agencies have failed to adapt their business models to the current demands of the people?
Taxation for news is not the answer. If there is no profit in news, eventually, no one will have news, right? Of course not. There is a demand for news and it requires the right innovators to come up with the appropriate business model for success. In 1840, 64% of the population were farmers. By 1990, less than 3% were farmers. Did we suffer an ultimate death in the agriculture industry? No. The world's economy evolves. People find new purpose. Industries learn how to become profitable. It is not up to you or I to figure out how to do it.
(Source: »www.agclassroom.org/gan/timeline···land.htm )
For as long as capitalism has been around, companies rise and fall. That is the nature of capitalism. Only recently have we decided that such a model is bad and failing businesses must be "bailed out" because we fear for the consequences.
We now pay more into corporate welfare than we do for personal welfare. We support failing businesses which no longer need to account for failure in their business model. Businesses no longer need to become efficient, innovate, or do anything right. They simply need to know how to acquire government assistance to keep their failed companies afloat
(Source: »thinkbynumbers.org/government-sp···tistics/ )
These companies should have failed. Would the demand for their products or services failed? No. Do people no longer need cars? Of course not. Our population is still growing and people still need private transportation to get to where they want. It'll just be provided by companies who can provide a product that people want at a price people are willing to pay.
But that's not how it works anymore. Now, companies will be bailed out. They can make bad decisions without consequences.
Corporate welfare is much more dangerous than social, personal welfare. With personal welfare, we can provide assistance to those who need it, but the rampant abuse means that productive members of society are leeching off of the rest of the people who work.
With the corporations having the ability to pay into politicians pockets with contributions, they can control which politicians can enter into the political arena. They can choose which ones survive and which ones get pushed out. Corporations can get billions of dollars and the politicians can get millions in return. The money comes from the tax payer.
Put enough people on personal welfare and you've absolutely disintegrated the middle class and small business. With corporate welfare, no one can rise out from the ashes, because new businesses cannot compete on innovation, service or lower prices. Corporations can lawyer them into oblivion.
Propping up newspapers is just another such symptom of this entire mess.
--
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have. -MLK | |
| | |
See 9 replies to this post | |
| | | said by drew:Now for my question... how does everyone propose that reporters get paid? You and I don't want to pay for it. The for-profit companies aren't interested in being unprofitable...
I don't think they can. Or at least, 80-90% of them cannot get paid for it.
Newspapers are trading analog dollars for digital dimes. They get 10x as much advertising revenue for a paper subscriber, than for a digital reader. Thus, even if a user pays for an online subscription, the newspaper is still well behind in terms of revenues.
Adaptation means something like what the Seattle PI did. They shut down the paper and became an online-only publication. But at the same time, they laid off 100% of their printing staff, and 80% of their reporting staff. In other words, they reduced their expenses to match the expected online revenues.
Sometimes, there's simply no easy way to adapt. You either shrink or die, and that's the end of the story. That's the nature of capitalism. It doesn't care how great a blacksmith you are -- interchangeable parts turned that profession into a niche. | |
| | Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | Their only way to get paid is advertisements like they do now for printed papers.
The vast majority of their money comes from advertisements.
The paper fee just covered the printing and delivery.
The real loss to them is classified and obituary fees, but that kind of has already happened. | |
|
tcopePremium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2 | Yup... When things change we do need a tax to protect the big media conglomerate's. How else are those executives going make their millions? It's not like companies come and go in the world. They need to stick around forever, even if there is no direct consumer support. | |
| Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Or... Stop giving away your product for free.
The news and journalism industry has already set a very bad precedent with posting their content online for free (or add supported). Add supported models will continue to see diminishing returns as saturation increases and block software improves.
Everyone likes catching up on the news, at some point the "free" model will have to go away in favor of paid content. | |
| | | | Re: Or... said by Atticka:Stop giving away your product for free.
Everyone likes catching up on the news, at some point the "free" model will have to go away in favor of paid content.
Only problem is that either everyone does this, or no one. If there is a way to get the news for free, that is where people will go.
Take away all free news outlets and then a pay site might have a chance in making it.
Unfortunately, I think that is highly, highly unlikely.
I used to read the paper every day... most days two. I can't even remember when the last time I got a paper was. Everything I need is available online. Weather, TV, local news stories, etc.
Of course, if Calvin & Hobbes came back, and was only available via a real newspaper, I'd gladly pay the $1 a day or whatever to read the strip.  | |
|
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Insight Communic..
| Newspapers already overcharge for online content My hometown newspaper charges $15 a month to access the paper online in .pdf format each day. Yet you can have it delviered to your home for $7.50 a month.
When I asked them why the online version was so much more they could not explain it. I told them it should be cheaper since they don't have to use paper, ink, electric to run their presses, carriers to deliver the paper etc. | |
| | | | Re: Newspapers already overcharge for online content Access a PDF instead of web format??? good grief...and it costs twice what the print version costs? | |
| | | | said by Bamafan2277:My hometown newspaper charges $15 a month to access the paper online in .pdf format each day. Yet you can have it delviered to your home for $7.50 a month.
When I asked them why the online version was so much more they could not explain it. I told them it should be cheaper since they don't have to use paper, ink, electric to run their presses, carriers to deliver the paper etc.
Same here.
My local paper (The Pocono Record) charges $20 a month for the online edition only.
To have both online and home delivery costs a few bucks less.
The paper has been bought by Rupert Murdoch.
Their local printing plant was shut down and moved to another state with lower taxes. The customer support was outsourced to India. Much of the articles are reprints from other sources, and the local stuff is just not very in-depth anymore.
Why should anybody support a business model like this?
If they went to online only, and charged a *reasonable* amount of money- like $20 for the entire year- I might actually consider it.
As it is, they're charging more than the WSJ and they can go to hell AFAIC.
--
“When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”
Sinclair Lewis | |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| Whaaaaat About Me? I wrote a program and sell it online. Well, sales have plummeted from around 200~300 a month to 40 a month.
I suggest I get a subsidy be paid to me.
Dave
--
I may have been born yesterday. But it wasn't at night. | |
|  TamaraBQuestion The Current ParadigmPremium
join:2000-11-08
Da Bronx
·Optimum Online
·Clearwire Wireless
| My Concern My concern about all of this is that the majority of actual on the ground and investigative reporting is being done by the major newspapers. Once they are gone, where will the source of real news come from? Bloggers? The wire services depend on papers for much of their income, defund that, and even more news gets unreported.
The press, historically newspapers, is a vital component of our democratic system. One has to be circumspect when dealing with a critical institution.
I don't think this is merely a problem with ludite management, although that's certainly partly to blame. In the electronic age we must find a way to preserve our ability to get accurate and timely information. A tax or fee of some kind doesn't seem to be a bad way to attack the problem. In the past, if you wanted to know what's happening in the world and in your government, you bought a newspaper. This purchase funded the news gathering operation. Today, with everything free on the net, where does the money to fund the news gathering come from? Well, that's why I must have a paper copy of the NY Times delivered even though I have an electronic subscription. Yes, the business model has to change, but it has to be a "business model" which involves revenue.
Since this is a critical institution which affects all, perhaps it should be publicly funded.
Bob
--
"Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot.
I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot."
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people"
| |
| westdc
join:2009-01-25
Amissville, VA
kudos:1 | WOW Maybe The Buggy whip markers should have tried that and they would still be in business today! | |
|  SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1 | I want a tax I want a tax that will support me and my lifestyle. Forget supporting out dated newspapers. | |
|  bohratomJersey Shore will rise again
join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ | Oh the Irony of the Ironies... I use the Internet to BYPASS the traditional Main Stream Media (aka NY Times, LA Times, WAPO) so I rather had a good laugh reading this story while drinking some coffee. | |
| | | | Re: Oh the Irony of the Ironies... Here we go again, lots of:
1. Capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread, and everything it destroy deserves to be destroyed, and/or
2. The fact that young people no longer like it means it is worthless.
...
1. Unfortunately, every society needs some things that don't make money. A source of news collected by reliable professionals, and fact checked, and edited by professional editors is one. One million blogs can't replace one good newspaper, because there is always a pressure inside one's head to tell the story with your most cherished beliefs embedded in it. Not many bloggers can resist that pressure. Newspaper professionalism can help a reporters resist it, and to me it seems that they do, quite often.
Good things like this go away easily and never come back. You may be old enough to remember when there was actually LOCAL NEWS ON THE RADIO. It was often very superficial, but it got the basic facts about their city out to the citizens. The FCC stopped requiring that news from radio stations decades ago, so the stations owners, being good capitalists, dropped it. It's not coming back.
Some things capitalism throws away turns out to be something the community realizes later that it really needs.
2. The young you may be ready now to dispense with something in society that the older you will want some day. Example: fast passenger trains. I remember well (This reminiscence will be brief!) how back in the '50s and 60 planes were SO COOL. The fares were rather high, but flying was fun: comfortable seats, small crowds in the airport, pretty stewardesses at you beck and call, no expectation of being blown up back then, flying through the heavens like a god. So train riding became uncool, and diminished year after year.
Now, if you're on a vacation trip rather than a business trip wouldn't it be nice to travel somewhere on a fast train?--They go up to 200 mph in Europe. If we had them here the traveling public would split between those who have to get where they're going REALLY FAST--who would take planes, and those who don't--some of whom would enjoy taking trains. In the train: less crowding in the cabin, less fear of dying--because even if the train crashes you're not certain to die, probably in fire, as you are in a plane when it crashes; less rigorous security checks (because of the difference just stated); and more comfort because the production cost of train travel per passenger mile are less than for a plane; so they don't cram you in so tightly.
And best of all you can look out the window at our country!
Older people, who get to take more vacations (I suspect) would like those things and pay for them. But if we throw passenger trains away completely now those older people will never get to try out the train experience--and in a few decades those older people will be YOU.
Newspapers are like those trains. It's very likely that if you let them wither away now, someday a lot of you will wish you had them back. | |
| | | bohratomJersey Shore will rise again
join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ | Re: Oh the Irony of the Ironies... That was a good laugh, I mean read.... | |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | newspaper? wassat?
on a side note azcentral has started charging for local news.
are you kidding me? i can turn on the TV for news. 
--
Despises any post with strings. | |
| | | no.. and heres why, not everyone in the world reads their news papers... they failed to adapt thus they fail completely..
the internet forces companies to adapt if they do not they will be left in the dust.. end of story, I do see it say UK thought.. this would never stand in the USA I HOPE lol | |
| | |  Broadband Tax - Old Folks don't want it either...
If you read the junk in most newspapers you will see why no one buys them anymore. It has nothing to do with technology, it has to do with content. I adapted from COBOL, FORTRAN and BASIC to Windows, Unix and Linux and have many really nice systems all with RAID, etc, etc. I adapted to broadband and I like it.
I still buy magazines that have content for when I want to kick back and read. Forget this silly stuff about how many billions of dollars that the non-adapters lose to whatever bogeyman they whine about. Newspaper content is their own problem, and has anyone noticed how much money Apple makes selling music? | |
|
| |
|
