Guest DisposableHeroes Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 (edited) What is their current business model? How long will it be before their websites are subscription based? Personally I think even the trash papers are good, they expose hypocrisy like no other. Edited September 3, 2009 by DisposableHeroes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarahBell Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Oldham chron do (or did) a real only version for a fee online Oldham advertiser free paper has not got local offices anymore, only two roving reporters to do the whole area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DisposableHeroes Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Oldham chron do (or did) a real only version for a fee onlineOldham advertiser free paper has not got local offices anymore, only two roving reporters to do the whole area. Two reporters I've got a great local paper, very interesting local relevant new to the area, it's free! With little advertising how can this work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sceptical Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/51820,news,m...s-international Will the others follow? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandandan Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 (edited) the 'brands' will survive, whether the physical papers will is another matter (i personally think they will, but on a much more scaled down infrastructure and circulation)... its only fairly recently they've started putting more into the online side of things... i doubt very much if the main sections of the website will become subscription only, news is accessible from any number of places online for free and will always be to a certain extent. if the papers made it all sub only, people would just go somewhere else. from a revenue generating aspect newspapers are quite good for targeting specific demographics, probably slightly more so than tv when in printed form, but less so online. its much more competative but as a whole the national press sites do very well in attracting traffic compared to bbc or sky. edit to add: although it depends if they mean the paper will be avaliable as a digital version (digital copy of the actual paper) or just access their current website... paying for a digital version is there at the moment and has been for some time, but its not very good as the interface is pretty poor. Edited September 3, 2009 by dandandan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepLurker Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 What is there current business model?How long will it be before their websites are subscription based? Personally I think even the trash papers are good, they expose hypocrisy like no other. A significant proportion of the "articles" in the press (paper or online) are either infomercials (so why bother paying?), opinion pieces (i.e. what a blog does for free) or copy-and-paste jobs from another news source. Still lots of scope for savings to be made. TBH I have no idea if even slimmed down papers will survive... I have no interest in them, HPC/Google News/YouTube are good enough for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DisposableHeroes Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 A significant proportion of the "articles" in the press (paper or online) are either infomercials (so why bother paying?), opinion pieces (i.e. what a blog does for free) or copy-and-paste jobs from another news source.Still lots of scope for savings to be made. TBH I have no idea if even slimmed down papers will survive... I have no interest in them, HPC/Google News/YouTube are good enough for me. Will they be bias? Is their purpose the news? What about investigative journalism, does diminish? Even if you don't read the newspapers the articles filter through in other media formats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric pebble Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 (edited) If the newspapers were REALLY worth their salt -- they would have - 10 years ago - investigated and outed the LIAR LOAN SCANDAL - and blown it out of the water.......... But they chose not to. Instead, to a man [just about] they [senior staff & owners, e.g. see Daily Express] climbed onto the bandwagon - and became property rampers instead. So, I couldn't give a flying F**K if they all burn in hell tbh. Edited September 3, 2009 by eric pebble Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DisposableHeroes Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 If the newspapers were REALLY worth their salt -- they would have - 10 years ago - investigated and outed the LIAR LOAN SCANDAL - and blown it out of the water.......... But they chose not to. Instead, to a man [just about] they [senior staff & owners, e.g. see Daily Express] climbed onto the bandwagon - and became property rampers instead. So, I couldn't give a flying F**K if they all burn in hell tbh. That's a fair point about not exposing Self Certs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepLurker Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Will they be bias?Is their purpose the news? What about investigative journalism, does diminish? Even if you don't read the newspapers the articles filter through in other media formats. Investigative journalism is a strong argument in favour of news media; unfortunately, there seems to be precious little of it nowadays, e.g. the expenses scandal revealed by the Telegraph. Can't really think of anything else this year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saving For a Space Ship Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 'Google news alerts' must have hammered them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackalope Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 'Google news alerts' must have hammered them It's craigslist that's putting them out of business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric pebble Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 It's craigslist that's putting them out of business. This is probably very likely... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Masked Tulip Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 There are numerous cases in the US where people have started up their own local newspapers and have either usurped the printed rag or have made a viable business where the printed rag has failed. The Internet has stopped the high cost access to the Media and the Meeja luvvies, barons, etc, do not like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric pebble Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 The Internet has stopped the high cost access to the Media and the Meeja luvvies, barons, etc, do not like it. Yup - the good days for them are over..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horridbloke Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 What is their current business model?How long will it be before their websites are subscription based? Personally I think even the trash papers are good, they expose hypocrisy like no other. Governments generally don't like newspapers, because newspapers (can) give people a clue about what's going on. I seem to remember something in school about massive newspaper taxes (17th century?) and coffee houses cashing in by buying newspapers to get customers in. I don't particularly care if large wads of cheap printed paper are no longer vanned up and down the country at 4am every morning, but I would be very worried indeed if professional journalism died. So how are we going to pay for this? The BBC website, which is rapidly becoming the news source of choice for many, has its income assured for a few more years but unfortunately it's rubbish. In several year's challenge Murdoch's challenge will be to convince Jo Public to pay a subscription to have a daily edition of something beamed to their ebook reader devices every morning. Yeah, I know Sony et al have been trying to punt this sort of thing to us since about 1990, but the devices are gradually getting less rubbish and will soon be feasible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DisposableHeroes Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Governments generally don't like newspapers, because newspapers (can) give people a clue about what's going on. I seem to remember something in school about massive newspaper taxes (17th century?) and coffee houses cashing in by buying newspapers to get customers in.I don't particularly care if large wads of cheap printed paper are no longer vanned up and down the country at 4am every morning, but I would be very worried indeed if professional journalism died. So how are we going to pay for this? The BBC website, which is rapidly becoming the news source of choice for many, has its income assured for a few more years but unfortunately it's rubbish. In several year's challenge Murdoch's challenge will be to convince Jo Public to pay a subscription to have a daily edition of something beamed to their ebook reader devices every morning. Yeah, I know Sony et al have been trying to punt this sort of thing to us since about 1990, but the devices are gradually getting less rubbish and will soon be feasible. But will people pay for subscription. Maybe the quality broadsheets, it's certainly going to be a challenge for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horridbloke Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 But will people pay for subscription. Maybe the quality broadsheets, it's certainly going to be a challenge for them. I think there's still a resistance to paying for non-tangible things, but people are coming around to the idea with things like digital music purchases. The smart publisher will tempt people in with a low-hassle low-commitment daily charge (paying for an entire month up-front is a lot if you don't know whether you're going to like the product). They'll also continue established promotional tactics and throw in the occasional exclusive picture of Girls Aloud wearing tight shiny outfits. The Sunday Times in its present form is definitely dead. What percentage of the physical pages printed each week are actually read before being chucked in the sadly inadequate recycling wheelie bin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 (edited) You can't buck the market right? There clearly isn't enough demand to support the failed 70's Marxist agenda that spews out of the Indy and Guardian on a daily basis, well certainly not enough demand to support their bloated operations and paying Polly >£250k each year. The BBC website costs us £150m each year extracted through taxes, and is deeply biased or simply ignores inconvenient stories or facts. The only reason GMG is still solvent is due to Autotrader, tax evasion and eliciting a monopoly on public job adverts, which will soon cease to exist. I guess cutting their own bloating pay packets hasn't crossed their mind yet, unthinkable, think of the 'public interest'. You don't need to cry for these fools, they've enjoyed a closed shop for too long and now the business of delivering wood pulp to peoples' front door has been exposed for the anachronism that it is. When the advertising market returns all growth and new spending will be directed to the web where they can demonstrate clear results and ROI, this will support a new crop of news players who do not carry the burden of swanky central London offices and over-paid commentators, money will never flow back to the old model and old players like it did before, even when the economy has improved, 2006-07 will mark the peak. Edited September 5, 2009 by sillybear2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric pebble Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 The Sunday Times in its present form is definitely dead. What percentage of the physical pages printed each week are actually read before being chucked in the sadly inadequate recycling wheelie bin? It's all too much to read - takes a week just to wade through it. A lot of it is a pile of sh1t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DisposableHeroes Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Radio four "You and Yours" tomorrow (on-line subscriptions). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiox Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Investigative journalism is a strong argument in favour of news media; unfortunately, there seems to be precious little of it nowadays, e.g. the expenses scandal revealed by the Telegraph. Can't really think of anything else this year There is still some at Private Eye - I think it's still worth the subscription. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Governments generally don't like newspapers, because newspapers (can) give people a clue about what's going on. I seem to remember something in school about massive newspaper taxes (17th century?) and coffee houses cashing in by buying newspapers to get customers in. Why do they spend such huge sums of money advertising public sector crap in them though? I also find all local press RABIDLY left wing, RABIDLY nimby, and of course RABIDLY pro devastating levels of house price inflation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.