As you’re probably aware, both the Globe and the Postmedia papers (including the National Post) have been making noises about re-working their news websites to accept a limited pay-access system. As in, after you look at a few selected news stories, you’re to pay a subscription fee to get access to the rest.
It was inevitable, of course. Traditional news media rely on hits on their sites for prestige and readership numbers, but at the same time physical newspaper subscriptions have been declining, as have advertising revenues. Someone has to pay for their news coverage, and after a few aborted attempts at total pay, they’ve decided on this new system.
So, the subject of this Challenge is simple: if your favorite news site starts charging for access to its contents, would you continue to use it? In other words, which news site has content (either hard news or opinion) that you’d be willing to lay down hard cash for?
Pingback: Blogging Tories Challenge: Which News Site Would You Pay Access For? | The Wellington Street Post
You left out my choice, which is that I have no problem with news organizations charging for their product, but I have no intention of paying one red cent for it given the poor job they do at the moment. That, by the way, applies to television and radio as much as to the print media.
I do not subscribe to television (not even basic cable), don’t listen to the radio regularly, and don’t take a newspaper. The web does keep me well informed via search, blogs, social forms, etc. I will read free articles (I seldom click a video link), and I love podcasts from around the world.
Really improving the quality of analysis, spending less time on process and “inside the Queensway” issues, and some better columnists would go a long way toward getting me to open my wallet. However, since that would require them to rethink their profit profiles, I’m not holding my breath.
It’ll be fun to watch those that decide to do this, go down. The leftie audience that most of the media cater to, won’t financially support their political parties on a large scale so what makes them think that these same people would pay them?
I will not pay for biased partisan coverage of news. I will not pay for news and get advertising.
The way to generate revenue as any web site does is through the adverts.
And like networks, the highest revenue will be generated by those sites that can attract the most sets of eyeballs.
Those sites that cannot attract will not be able to generate income.
It will also be helpful to note those sites that decide to go to the publicly traded route will have to understand that investors don’t give two hoots about content.
I don’t subscribe to them nor read them now, so being available on the internet would not change a thing. I have no interest in paying to read propaganda and biased opinions from small-minded agenda-driven “journalists” in lieu of news reporting.
He who pays the piper calls the tune (Yes, we all provide the money but we don’t get to pay the piper – only faceless corporate apparatchiks do). I would rather pay a pittance for each news or commentary item that I choose to see or hear than leave it to O-SO SOFT swipe to determine what I may receive. Subscription pay per view funding would quickly eliminate the CBC and most other leftist outlets.
What news? What station just gives the news and not their spin on the news? Even the weather stations are more into fashion than giving the weather & their GW slant. Nobody would miss 98% of these television stations. And just the fact that I must accept about 50 french & 25 Swahili or whatever stations in order to get my 10 favorite channels is a total rip off. Only the Sun news network gives us the straight facts with no BS spin. I actually feel that if PM Harper cut all spending on the CBC he would get a bigger majority. NEWS what news.
I wouldn’t pay for for it. I might be willing to pay a small monthly fee for a collection of news sites but I wouldn’t pay for just one.
Agree about not paying for biased partisan coverage, I wouldn’t pay one red cent for the Star. I would pay for straight up news reporting from various sources but it’s hard to get accurate and truthful information these days.