Groups » Frugal Friday (bargains & discounts)

Would you pay for news online?

by bellini 31 August 2010 |

8 comments | Love

Love 0 loves

I'm a fan of The Times online, but since they've started charging for their content, I use The Guardian instead.
I find I get the same quality of news, so I'm not sure what would convinvce me to get a subscription.
I just wondered what others thought about this and if anyone has decided to take a subscription?

Report

Comments (8)

16

PaulM posted
I think if you're going to put a paywall up you need to have a unique selling point, like the Spectator or Economist have. The Times just doesn't have that.
Posted on 02 September 2010 | Love 1 love Report
21

loveWheel posted
It might be becoming a popular idea though, unfortunately. I went to a site (I'd never heard of) the other day that was the top result on Google only to find that I had to pay to read its content. Still, it's nothing a bit of going back and clicking the second Google result didn't fix.
It is a strange concept though, online media. All this useful information that time and money is poured into and it's almost always free and everyone expects it to be.
Posted on 03 September 2010 | Love 0 loves Report
41

lovelindstrom posted
Only if it was very niched with no luck of finding similar quality content elsewhere, hobbies etc.
Would only pay for news online if I deemed the journalists interesting enough, to focus more on their story than the actual news value.
Posted on 03 September 2010 | Love 1 love Report
5

Joseph Moore posted
@loveWheel - it's interesting that Google had crawled the page yet it was paid for content. In theory then you could just view Google's cached copy and read the bulk of it for free. Sounds like the publisher was trying to have his cake and eat it in terms of search engine rankings and being paid for the content.
I think there's always room for paid content on the Internet - but as mentioned, it's much more likely to be a niche market or tied in to a hobby or interest where there's probably some other value added - rather than a simple money for articles transaction.
Posted on 03 September 2010 | Love 1 love Report
21

loveWheel posted
Expert's exchange does that but it's hilarious. Take this link: http://www.experts-exchange.com/Programming/Languages/C_Sharp/Q_25900272.html
There is a question then a PAY MONEY TO SEE THE ANSWER. How did Google get that? Well, scroll all the way to the bottom and there are all the answers.
Posted on 06 September 2010 | Love 0 loves Report
0

foss99 posted
No, subscriptions are pointless - guardian is the best. Why pay when you can get it for free?
Posted on 28 October 2011 | Love 0 loves Report
5

mknee posted
I'd pay for good quality journalism on a PAYG basis, maybe 5-10p per article. Only if I couldn't get it free elsewhere AND there was a really quick, easy way to pay - which there isn't.....

I think this kind of payment model will come in time though......
Posted on 06 November 2011 | Love 0 loves Report
5

anonyy posted
Daily mail was going down this route for their iPhone app, but later change it to adds or subscription. I don't mind he ads but I would never Pay. Is everything they Put I the paper on the white, I'd not it's a riP off
Posted on 05 February 2012 | Love 0 loves Report

Post a reply

W3C Thank you for using One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest