Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Newsday)   Newsday to charge $5 a week for full access to its online content, calling it a "pioneering Web model" that will no doubt pioneer them right into bankrupcty   ( newsday.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Newsday, limited access, Silver Spring, managing editor, By KEIKO MORRIS, subscribers, case study, sales manager  
•       •       •

4170 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Oct 2009 at 10:41 AM (7 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



192 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2009-10-22 11:27:57 AM  

chandler_vt: Knucklepopper: chandler_vt: That is the suby's point..

Subby's point seems to be that access to the news should be free.

Subby's point is - what makes you think people will pay $5 when you can hardly get people to read it for free?

Clearly if you are not selling enough papers it means people are not interested in buying them. So for some odd reason they will be willing to pay more money for same content online (which other sources are providing for free)?

And if you believe that news should not be free, you are born in the wrong century.


As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.

* Commissioner Pravin Lal, "U.N. Declaration of Rights"
 
2009-10-22 11:28:11 AM  
How long until they fold completely? Any guesses?
 
2009-10-22 11:28:44 AM  
The news sites would have to like those asshole colluding oil companies...

You'll wake up one morning and find EVERY SINGLE SITE on the web will be charging this $5.
The next morning, they will be $5.02....and so on.
What a business model. Can't lose.
 
2009-10-22 11:29:06 AM  
I honestly had no idea that Newsday was still around.
 
2009-10-22 11:29:13 AM  
If I ever neared bankrupcty, I would expect that my accoutnatn would wanr me before it happende.
 
2009-10-22 11:30:18 AM  

PitaCJ: Dixie_Normous: I've had Farkers give me free TF for a month, twice.

It's just not worth it - I got real tired of seeing 20 of the same stories posted.

And most of the threads were empty of comment. Kinda like going to a party, and no one else shows up. What's the fun of that?

You were just doing it wrong.

I miss TF :( I wish I wasn't so broke.

Of course, I wouldn't pay 5 bucks a week for a newspaper either. I liked paying 5 a month for my cheap entertainment/information/news/bad advice and an occasional personal tragedy so awesome I get to laugh for months on end website.


If I wasn't also broke, I'd buy you a months worth of TF, since you enjoyed it.

Hope you get some $$ and can TF for yourself again!
 
2009-10-22 11:30:21 AM  

emerson7: i just cannot imagine this being a winning strategy


This. Is America.

Pet Rock
Paris Hilton
AIG performance bonuses

Sometimes the WEIRDEST things get a whole LOTTA money
 
2009-10-22 11:31:21 AM  

TwistedIvory: Seriously, $20/mo for online content?

Good luck with that.


It works for porn!

Of course, I bet the online content for porn is an assload better than what's on Newsday.
 
2009-10-22 11:33:58 AM  
chandler_vt:

I'll take these one at a time.

Q. Subby's point is - what makes you think people will pay $5 when you can hardly get people to read it for free?

A. They're not. Online will be free for paying subscribers. What NewsDay is doing is devaluing their Web content and making their cable/print subscription worth something. This is a simple, but good idea. If someone is crazy enough to buy a $20 a month subscription, what they're saying is, splendid. But if they don't, that's okay too because readers do not equal customers.

Q. Clearly if you are not selling enough papers it means people are not interested in buying them. So for some odd reason they will be willing to pay more money for same content online (which other sources are providing for free)?

A. Negative. While some news is wire-generated content, NewsDay actually has a large news staff that produces plenty of original content. (some of the content is going to be free, I assume that's the wire stuff).

Q. And if you believe that news should not be free, you are born in the wrong century.

A. You might think news should be free and that's fine but you can't possibly think news production should be free. If you do, I'd urge you to look at whatever industry you're in and ask yourself whether that also should be free.
 
2009-10-22 11:34:19 AM  

Catsaregreen: What?! I have to pay for content that a real, live human being had to put together. Probably a human being with a spouse and children to support. Whaaaaa! Whaaaaa! I want everything for free. Mommy and daddy and support me while I live in their basement. Why can't everyone else!


Because that particular whine has always worked in the past.

/like trying to recover from a stall by pulling back on the stick
 
2009-10-22 11:35:28 AM  

Knucklepopper: chandler_vt:

I'll take these one at a time.

Q. Subby's point is - what makes you think people will pay $5 when you can hardly get people to read it for free?

A. They're not. Online will be free for paying subscribers. What NewsDay is doing is devaluing their Web content and making their cable/print subscription worth something. This is a simple, but good idea. If someone is crazy enough to buy a $20 a month subscription, what they're saying is, splendid. But if they don't, that's okay too because readers do not equal customers.

Q. Clearly if you are not selling enough papers it means people are not interested in buying them. So for some odd reason they will be willing to pay more money for same content online (which other sources are providing for free)?

A. Negative. While some news is wire-generated content, NewsDay actually has a large news staff that produces plenty of original content. (some of the content is going to be free, I assume that's the wire stuff).

Q. And if you believe that news should not be free, you are born in the wrong century.

A. You might think news should be free and that's fine but you can't possibly think news production should be free. If you do, I'd urge you to look at whatever industry you're in and ask yourself whether that also should be free.


A lot of reportedly literate citizens think health care should be free.
 
2009-10-22 11:35:53 AM  
This is not New.

This is not pioneering.

Newspapers and Magazines tried this briefly in the 90's, and it didn't work.

It didn't work then.
It won't work now.
 
2009-10-22 11:35:57 AM  
I wonder how long it's going to take news companies to realize that nobody wants to pay for thier stupid bullshiat non-stories.

Hopefully long enough for moost if not all of them to go bankrupt. I can go anywhere and find stuff that's not news for free.

Yes, I know bottled water companies have had enormous success selling stuff to morons that they can get anywhere for free, but THEY have good PR and advertising. You news companies? Not so much. Fewer and fewer people are paying attention because not only is the bullshiat you're "reporting" not news, it's not interesting, and people are finally getting tired of it.
 
2009-10-22 11:36:23 AM  

Fano: A lot of reportedly literate citizens think health care should be free.


Can't help you there. Don't jack the thread.
 
2009-10-22 11:38:13 AM  

ishus37: ClockCat: uberhund72: Didn't they declare bankruptcy already at some point? And $5 a week, is that more than what you would pay to get it home delivered?

Newspapers here are $5/month.

Yeah, this seems more expensive than a paper newspaper, which, unlike a desktop, you can take to the can.


I have a netbook that I have been taking with me all over the place lately. It is light and the battery lasts forever in it even if I'm browsing or watching a video. I have taken that to the bathroom quite a few times. No, it isn't a desktop but it is kind of neat.
 
2009-10-22 11:38:50 AM  

jbrooks544: This is not New.

This is not pioneering.

Newspapers and Magazines tried this briefly in the 90's, and it didn't work.

It didn't work then.
It won't work now.


Like gay marriage?
 
2009-10-22 11:39:01 AM  
Slartibartfaster:

This. Is America.

Pet Rock
Paris Hilton
AIG performance bonuses

Sometimes the WEIRDEST things get a whole LOTTA money


Paris Hilton = rich daddy
AIG performance bonuses = rich uncle
Pet Rock = ????

if we could only find a pattern here, we might be on to something.
 
2009-10-22 11:39:31 AM  

natetimm: TwistedIvory: Seriously, $20/mo for online content?

Good luck with that.

My WoW account is cheaper and I never even play it. At least I can log on to that and get verbally abused by teenagers.


If you don't use it, can I have your $15/month?
( or whatever the price of WoW is these days )

/subscriptions for games... how did the internet get this way?
 
jph
2009-10-22 11:39:51 AM  
The only site intended for the general public that has been able to pull this off is WSJ.com. Everything else either has a very specific target audience (eg. professionals of a certain industry).
 
2009-10-22 11:39:57 AM  

Celerian: El Chode: You idiots liters seem to not understand the difference between $5 a week for news you can get anywhere else, and $5 a month for total superiority.

Yous idiots TFers seems tos thinks yours sos superiors withs yours "totals superiorities." Goes chokes.


www.furiacontralamaquina.com
Approves.
 
2009-10-22 11:40:13 AM  

TsukasaK: epic


That's impressive, and very cool.
 
2009-10-22 11:40:28 AM  
@Lt. Cheese Weasel. Do you know who the HA HA guy is supposed to be a drawing of? does anybody?
 
2009-10-22 11:41:18 AM  
Pfft, TotalFark. Ultrafark is where it's at. I mean, you can

++++++ CARRIER LOST ++++++
 
2009-10-22 11:41:22 AM  

Knucklepopper: chandler_vt:

I'll take these one at a time.

Q. Subby's point is - what makes you think people will pay $5 when you can hardly get people to read it for free?

A. They're not. Online will be free for paying subscribers. What NewsDay is doing is devaluing their Web content and making their cable/print subscription worth something. This is a simple, but good idea. If someone is crazy enough to buy a $20 a month subscription, what they're saying is, splendid. But if they don't, that's okay too because readers do not equal customers.


readers = customers when you make a significant portion of your profits off of advertisers.

Also, $5/week has got to be comparable to the cost of print editions. Shouldn't a web version should be some fraction of that. The problem is that the online price is way too steep, and because of that you shrink your potential reader base.
 
2009-10-22 11:42:09 AM  

fizzix_is_fun: readers = customers when you make a significant portion of your profits off of advertisers.


They haven't been. Nobody has. THat's the problem.
 
2009-10-22 11:43:00 AM  

Fano: A lot of reportedly literate citizens think health care should be free


They think the government should pay for health care. There's a difference, unless you believe we should be moving to a BBC model of government owned news.
 
2009-10-22 11:44:03 AM  
Only if it meant you got to drink with Jimmy Breslin.
 
2009-10-22 11:44:46 AM  

EmployeeOfTheMinute: How long until they fold completely? Any guesses?


It depends on how long Cablevision is willing to keep shoveling money into it, and whether or not the NY Post and the Daily News will keep their free models. If the model fails rapidly, I think they abandon it in 6 months and try to fight on. If it's a slow decline, maybe 2 years until they cease to be. If the other papers switch over to a similar model, I say maybe 5 years, with some bonus time if the News or Post kicks off first.

You have to keep in mind that for many subscribers who aren't completely enthralled with Newsday, they take the "deals" and switch to other papers when they're done. So they may do a $2 a week promotion for home delivery for 6 weeks or 3 months. When it's up, they wait for the Daily News or Post to run something similar, or even the Times if they're willing to pay a bit more. And they just cycle like that throughout the year. So even subscribers aren't paying full price.
 
2009-10-22 11:49:24 AM  

Knucklepopper: fizzix_is_fun: readers = customers when you make a significant portion of your profits off of advertisers.

They haven't been. Nobody has. THat's the problem.


They used to. They overplayed their hands, bringing in crappy flashing, pop-up, scam, sound-playing and slow-loading ads, instead of more reasonable content related ads. However, they shot themselves in the foot, and any web-savvy person has ads blocked by now.

I don't think ad-based is survivable at this point. I also don't think that $5 a week subscription is reasonable at all.

Personally I'd like to see NYtimes charge $1 a month or 1 cent an article and get some good investigative journalism back. Allow news to be distributed for free 2 days after it's published online, opinion and special features can wait a week. What's wrong with this model?
 
2009-10-22 11:50:04 AM  
I just read that Hulu will be charging in 2010. I really think that these people wanted advertising supported on air content to fail, the imaginary numbers are too enticing. When you have customers who are getting commercial supported TV or other content, trying to get all of them to pay is too enticing. I don't think it will work as well as they want it to. It's a sad day really.
 
2009-10-22 11:53:00 AM  
*************Thread Jack*******************************

Hi all, sorry to jack, but i am getting desperate, I am at work and am getting blocked on most sites regarding cooking, so I am turning to the awsomeness of the fark cooks out there...

I need to butter poach a lobster and I am looking for the best ways to do it, any suggestions would be great of you fine folks. Thanks in advance, and sorry to jack the thread....

*****************end Thread Jack*********************
 
2009-10-22 11:55:13 AM  

fizzix_is_fun: They used to. They overplayed their hands, bringing in crappy flashing, pop-up, scam, sound-playing and slow-loading ads, instead of more reasonable content related ads. However, they shot themselves in the foot, and any web-savvy person has ads blocked by now.

I don't think ad-based is survivable at this point. I also don't think that $5 a week subscription is reasonable at all.

Personally I'd like to see NYtimes charge $1 a month or 1 cent an article and get some good investigative journalism back. Allow news to be distributed for free 2 days after it's published online, opinion and special features can wait a week. What's wrong with this model?


Ads have not worked. As far back as 2005, 90 percent of ad revenue came from print and 10 percent from online while 90 percent of readers were online and ten percent in print. The only paper who's managed to flip the inverse was the LA Times but that was only through laying off a significant portion of their staff and growing introvert, focusing on SoCal.
$5 a week subscription is not surviveable but you're missing the point. They're elevating the worth of their print and cable subscriptions by devaluing the Internet. As it should be.
So you are willing to pay one cent an article for good investigative journalism? How nice for you.
I'm willing to pay $3 a month for rent. I'll wish in my pocket while you shiat in yours and we'll see which one fills up first.
 
2009-10-22 11:55:27 AM  

olddeegee: I just read that Hulu will be charging in 2010. I really think that these people wanted advertising supported on air content to fail, the imaginary numbers are too enticing. When you have customers who are getting commercial supported TV or other content, trying to get all of them to pay is too enticing. I don't think it will work as well as they want it to. It's a sad day really.


charging for hulu as it is now won't work. Allowing someone to download an episode for 5-10 cents each may work though.

The problem with charging for TV shows is that it's trivial for anyone to digitize it when it airs and put it on a peer-to-peer network. They do this already. I think many people would be willing to pay a nominal fee for a legal alternative. The trick is finding the price at which people say, "fark it, i'm downloading the illegal torrent"
 
2009-10-22 11:56:07 AM  

jbrooks544: This is not New.

This is not pioneering.

Newspapers and Magazines tried this briefly in the 90's, and it didn't work.

It didn't work then.
It won't work now.


This. So very this. Back then it was called AOL. And they had a lot of news content behind their paid firewall. This is just the old hoary AOL/Compuserve model dolled up in new clothes. It failed when content providers found they could get more revenue with a free-with-advertising approach than a firewall subscription approach -- and that was during a good economy. Now in a bad economy the rations are probably skewed even more toward the advertising model generating more revenue than the paid firewall model given that there's even less discretionary income floating around.
 
2009-10-22 11:56:39 AM  
Sure it's absurd, but just think about this- so far 130+ comments talking about Newsday. That's free word-of-mouth advertising right there...

/had never heard of them til now.
 
2009-10-22 11:57:17 AM  

fizzix_is_fun: The trick is finding the price at which people say, "fark it, i'm downloading the illegal torrent"


And then Fark will be filled with raucous cries of how unfair it is to have to pay as the industry starts suing against the download crowd. 2003 all over again.
 
2009-10-22 12:01:45 PM  

Knucklepopper: So you are willing to pay one cent an article for good investigative journalism? How nice for you.


If by "good investigative journalism" you mean rephrasing a White House press release, then even 1¢ per article is too much.
 
2009-10-22 12:03:01 PM  

Alien Robot: If by "good investigative journalism" you mean rephrasing a White House press release, then even 1¢ per article is too much.


Yes, because that's exactly what I meant.
 
2009-10-22 12:07:16 PM  

Tigggy: Sure it's absurd, but just think about this- so far 130+ comments talking about Newsday. That's free word-of-mouth advertising right there...

/had never heard of them til now.


So that makes them not quite as popular as horse sex.

//straight from the ......
 
2009-10-22 12:07:18 PM  

Knucklepopper: fizzix_is_fun: They used to. They overplayed their hands, bringing in crappy flashing, pop-up, scam, sound-playing and slow-loading ads, instead of more reasonable content related ads. However, they shot themselves in the foot, and any web-savvy person has ads blocked by now.

I don't think ad-based is survivable at this point. I also don't think that $5 a week subscription is reasonable at all.

Personally I'd like to see NYtimes charge $1 a month or 1 cent an article and get some good investigative journalism back. Allow news to be distributed for free 2 days after it's published online, opinion and special features can wait a week. What's wrong with this model?

Ads have not worked. As far back as 2005, 90 percent of ad revenue came from print and 10 percent from online while 90 percent of readers were online and ten percent in print. The only paper who's managed to flip the inverse was the LA Times but that was only through laying off a significant portion of their staff and growing introvert, focusing on SoCal.
$5 a week subscription is not surviveable but you're missing the point. They're elevating the worth of their print and cable subscriptions by devaluing the Internet. As it should be.


Putting something online and charging for it is a huge cost saver for a company that doesn't have to print and distribute an actual print copy. The cost of reading an article online should be reflected in that cost saving. The internet is an amazing tool of dissemination and making your product visible to a larger audience. Devaluing that seems like an extremely poor business model.


So you are willing to pay one cent an article for good investigative journalism? How nice for you.
I'm willing to pay $3 a month for rent. I'll wish in my pocket while you shiat in yours and we'll see which one fills up first.


you missed the point as well. Right now, where can I go for investigative journalism? I pick up a newspaper every so often and it's filled with complete crap. The closest thing to news articles are stories copied directly from the AP wire, but they can hardly be called investigative. The point is, if you're going to charge for your news, it better be something good. Maybe Newsday is a huge bastion of in-depth reporting. I don't know. Skimming their website, it doesn't seem so though.

Of course if you want to continue the model of overcharging for crap, you can enjoy your slow march into bankruptcy. I can get the same level of crap for free.
 
2009-10-22 12:08:00 PM  

Knucklepopper: Alien Robot: If by "good investigative journalism" you mean rephrasing a White House press release, then even 1¢ per article is too much.

Yes, because that's exactly what I meant.


"good" and "investigative journalism" don't belong in the same sentence ballpark planet galaxy universe these days.

What's happening is that "news" is losing its value as cost of distribution approaches zero.. kinda like the music industry. The price of a song nowadays (that people are willing to pay) is around US$1.00
 
2009-10-22 12:09:09 PM  

MedianJoe: @Lt. Cheese Weasel. Do you know who the HA HA guy is supposed to be a drawing of? does anybody?


i141.photobucket.com
 
2009-10-22 12:09:37 PM  

Knucklepopper: They're elevating the worth of their print and cable subscriptions by devaluing the Internet. As it should be.


Their print subscriptions aren't exactly doing stellar, and it's not because people are simply deciding, "I love Newsday, but I can read it for free online." It's more like "I like local sports, business, and national news, and I can find more and better content for those things, for free, elsewhere." Advertisers aren't exactly flocking to newspapers, either. And the alternative revenue streams of classified ads and job listings have been done better online.

If Cablevision decides to include a Newsday subscription (including web content) to all Cablevision customers, then maybe the advertisers will come back, and they can live on for a while longer. But this new model of pay-for-content isn't going to work. Devaluing your internet content only makes sense if you're able to float on your print model, and NewsDay hasn't shown evidence that it can. Not in this environment of multiple and varied competitors.
 
2009-10-22 12:10:37 PM  

perdu: What's Newsday?


kevra: *************Thread Jack*******************************

Hi all, sorry to jack, but i am getting desperate, I am at work and am getting blocked on most sites regarding cooking, so I am turning to the awsomeness of the fark cooks out there...

I need to butter poach a lobster
and I am looking for the best ways to do it, any suggestions would be great of you fine folks. Thanks in advance, and sorry to jack the thread....

*****************end Thread Jack*********************


Poaching is illegal. No Farker will contribute to illegal activity.

Try Newsday.
 
2009-10-22 12:16:44 PM  

Fano:
As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.

* Commissioner Pravin Lal, "U.N. Declaration of Rights"


Pffft!

"Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant. Need as well as greed have followed us to the stars, and the rewards of wealth still await those wise enough to recognize this deep thrumming of our common pulse.

CEO Nwabudike Morgan
"The Centauri Monopoly"
 
2009-10-22 12:18:24 PM  

TsukasaK: "good" and "investigative journalism" don't belong in the same sentence ballpark planet galaxy universe these days.


What does this even mean?

What's happening is that "news" is losing its value as cost of distribution approaches zero.. kinda like the music industry. The price of a song nowadays (that people are willing to pay) is around US$1.00

When I was buying cassettes in the late 1980s, they were about $10 for anywhere from 8-11 songs. That seems like a fairly consistent value.
Distribution is the not the issue; production is.
 
2009-10-22 12:19:16 PM  
That is probably more than their physical subscription.
 
2009-10-22 12:21:20 PM  
Here's a question: Who is clicking on all these ad links on the internet?

I mean, is it people clicking by accident, or is it all the people online who are not that web savvy? Like my mom for instance.

Because I have never in 10-12 years voluntarily clicked on an ad link/banner. I even avert my eyes and hit mute when I am forced to watch a commercial on a site.
 
2009-10-22 12:23:02 PM  

MedianJoe: @Lt. Cheese Weasel. Do you know who the HA HA guy is supposed to be a drawing of? does anybody?


It was some sort of antediluvian denture-adhesive advertisement that someone scanned in. Something like "HA! HA! I'm using FORBES INSOLUBLE PLATES!"
 
2009-10-22 12:23:48 PM  

emerson7: if we could only find a pattern here, we might be on to something.


My Dad always used to say (and I miss him for more than just this)

"Remember the golden rule, he who has the gold, makes all the rules"

Yeah I know he didnt write it. But the older I get the more it seems irrefutable.
 
Displayed 50 of 192 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report