TopGun Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8186701.stm "Quality journalism is not cheap," says Mr Murdoch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 Didn't people already try to charge for news websites in the early days of the internet? It didn't work then, and I don't see why it will work now. People will just look at the free sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 If no-one pays for anything though, there will be no-one able to make a living out of it, so there will be no-one to make the product. However, while I think it'll work in the US, I don't see how it can here with the BBC, which has to be free at point of use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I think that the majors will fall in line and whilst there will be many other sites, they will make it a closed shop. Then they will squeeze and margianalise the lesser news sites.There will be a clamp donw on blatent plaguerism. It has always surprised me that the news papers have free to read sites as their hard copies sell less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 As long as BBC is free then no other site will last if they charge a fee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 If no-one pays for anything though, there will be no-one able to make a living out of it, so there will be no-one to make the product. However, while I think it'll work in the US, I don't see how it can here with the BBC, which has to be free at point of use.yeah but the froth that the Sun dleivers or the more high brow the Times etc do the BBC cant compete with. It is not the same reading a newspaper on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I think that the majors will fall in line and whilst there will be many other sites, they will make it a closed shop. Then they will squeeze and margianalise the lesser news sites.There will be a clamp donw on blatent plaguerism. It has always surprised me that the news papers have free to read sites as their hard copies sell less. You might have noticed that the free to read sites are riddled with ads. That's where they get their revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8186701.stm "Quality journalism is not cheap," says Mr Murdoch. What? The Sun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 You might have noticed that the free to read sites are riddled with ads. That's where they get their revenue.so does the hard copy that is paid for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 That's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 You might have noticed that the free to read sites are riddled with ads. That's where they get their revenue. And that revenue is dropping through the floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I giggle at the "Full Users" posting on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I giggle at the "Full Users" posting on this thread.why? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I think he's intimating that people clearly will pay for something that has alternatives available for free elsewhere. I like to think we're the Times rather than the Sun though. Who am I kidding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbury Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I giggle at the "Full Users" posting on this thread. Registered Users? Full Members? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I like to think we're the Times rather than the Sun though. I dunno, there are a number of tits on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I giggle at the "Full Users" posting on this thread. There's a difference between being an active contributor to a site (which is just about worth paying for), and simply reading one (which isn't). Maybe that's it, Murdoch is going to get his subscribers to write the articles as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 6 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 6 August, 2009 I see a parallel with efforts made by the banks to charge for services people think should be free such as cash from atms. The newspapers may all agree secretly they want to charge but the odds are one will always fall out of line. They could get accused of cartelism anyway too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwig Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 FT seems to be doing ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rory Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 There are many other ways of paying for tits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 6 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 6 August, 2009 FT seems to be doing ok. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8187762.stm Good article that highlights the issues and explains why the FT is able to charge online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_Jonny Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 Ive never used any site other than the BBC so it means nothing to me. Clearly add revenue and the MASSIVE subscribership Mr Murdoch has around the world isnt enough. Money grabbing tosser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 6 August, 2009 Share Posted 6 August, 2009 Two more websites to stop visiting. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Keith Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 sounds almost as ridiculous and doomed to failure as charging to use an innernetz forum....oh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 (edited) Ive never used any site other than the BBC so it means nothing to me. Clearly add revenue and the MASSIVE subscribership Mr Murdoch has around the world isnt enough. Money grabbing tosser. That's the problem you see. The BBC is massively parasitic - for example all the local news you see on the TV will have been in the local papers anything up to a month before (the national papers are the same, TBF). Radio headlines are often just read-out from newspapers etc (it works the other way too, just nowhere near as much). If people only go to the BBC site, newspapers (and commercial broadcasters for that matter) get no income and the bottom of the chain collapses. I suppose if you think about it, it is sort of like the problems the top football teams will have if the cash doesn't make it down the pyramid. However, the only way paywalls will work in the UK is if the copyright laws are changed (which will never happen), to prevent articles being lifted and rewritten by the other sites/broadcasters/papers, forcing the likes of the BBC to do more grass roots stuff OR if the BBC's online operations are taken out of the licence fee funding and forced to go commercial (which again, will never happen). Edited 7 August, 2009 by Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 7 August, 2009 Share Posted 7 August, 2009 The news pages on timesonline will still be free to view - however comment pieces (from Clarkson, AA Gill etc) and business pages/ recruitment pages will be paid for access only. Other publishers will probably follow suit, online ad' revenue on news websites is declining, there's far more value in data of subscribers from a subscription service (you'd be amazed at the amount of people that do not "tick the box" to stop their information being shared) timesonline subscibers - due to their high demographic profile - would be of very high value to direct response advertising. Expect other publishers to follow suit - love him or hate him where Murdoch leads others follow. He's already lobbying for the BBC to curb their online content, although mainly it effects local press more than national. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now