- Joined
- 23 March 2005
- Posts
- 1,943
- Reactions
- 1
THE loyalty of readers accustomed to getting their news online free is about to be tested, as Australia's largest newspaper groups prepare to charge for access to their websites.
Fairfax Media is considering two levels of access, one free and the other incurring a charge, as newspapers move to protect declining revenues.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/fairfax-news-to-charge-for-online-20090808-edm3.html
No mention of fees yet.
Does this spell the beginning of the end of free news from the maintream papers?
Will it work?
How much $$ is a fair amount to pay?
Not a hope - there are thousands of news outlets & there will always be thousands of freebies.
Why would I pay to be brainwashed when I can get it for free.
Actual news maybe (but not while there's freebies available...).
But I'd never pay for the outright propaganda that the mainstream press prints. A lot more people seem to be waking up to the reality of how dumbed down the media has become and that, not the online alternative per se, is cutting sales of newspapers.
Paris Hilton, Britney and every other celebrity - that's NOT news. It belongs on page 50, not page 1, if it gets published at all.
War somewhere, natural disaster somewhere else, forecast of another drought this summer in Australia and so on - that's news and it belongs on the front page or in the first few pages, not as a two line bit buried somewhere on page 30.
Every now and then, I know some news before any media outlet has broadcast / printed it. And in almost all cases what they report is at best a dumbed down version of the facts, at worst an outright fabrication. Once I became aware of this, I stopped watching TV news and stopped buying newspapers. If they can't accurately report something fairly simple that happend in their own state then I sure don't trust them to get it right with anything that's complicated, interstate or overseas.
They can't even get it right when they're handed the official media release with all the info. Sometimes they just print it word for word but more often than not they remove anything that sounds remotely complicated or involves numbers, which if it's a technical subject largely makes the whole thing pointless.
Definitely not. But I would pay for ABC Radio news and current affairs.
Have to laugh at Murdoch - he says quality journalism doesnt come cheap and so he will have to charge for it. Only problem is, his online (and paper) news productions are full of rubbish and the stuff that is cheap to buy from external sources - namely your Paris does Dallas kind of stuff. Seriously, who does he think will actually buy this stuff?
the future looks something like this ...
the future looks something like this ...
Not in any realistic sense, Calliope.You already do.
Murdoch is a greedy prick!
I had, up until recently, been advertised my photography services in one of his local papers.
Now, after enquiring about their rates, I am advertising in the other Non-Murdoch local paper. The rates are less than half of what the Murdoch paper was.
See ya Rupert
Not in any realistic sense, Calliope.
I reckon I get hugely more than 6 cents per day of value from the ABC.
(That's what it was the last time I checked.)
THE loyalty of readers accustomed to getting their news online free is about to be tested, as Australia's largest newspaper groups prepare to charge for access to their websites.
Fairfax Media is considering two levels of access, one free and the other incurring a charge, as newspapers move to protect declining revenues.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/fairfax-news-to-charge-for-online-20090808-edm3.html
No mention of fees yet.
Does this spell the beginning of the end of free news from the maintream papers?
Will it work?
How much $$ is a fair amount to pay?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?