Why do people balk at paying for the digital newspaper?

post reply Forum Index » Off-Topic
[Post New]10/12/2020 12:34
quote
Anonymous
It's so interesting to me that people will pay for a physical newspaper subscription, but get mad that the same newspaper charges for a digital subscription. Or, maybe they are mad that the paper gives some content away for free as a service?


[Post New]10/12/2020 12:37
quote
jsmith123
Member Offline
People are just accustomed to getting online services for free. And there are several "news" services out there that are ad supported or have other financial models.

I wish people would just pay for good journalism. It would probably reduce click bait.
[Post New]10/12/2020 12:45
quote
Anonymous
Agreed. I love the Washington Post, personally. My digital subscription comes due around Black Friday every year and I consider it an early holiday gift to myself.
[Post New]10/12/2020 12:49
quote
Anonymous
I don't get a home delivery. But for some reason when I get a newspaper I read it front to back. Online is just weird to me, much prefer the physical paper.
[Post New]10/12/2020 12:49
quote
Anonymous
jsmith123 wrote:People are just accustomed to getting online services for free. And there are several "news" services out there that are ad supported or have other financial models.

I wish people would just pay for good journalism. It would probably reduce click bait.


+1

A reminder that if you aren't paying, you're the product. People get mad that articles are behind paywalls, but they also complain about the quality of contemporary journalism. Good journalism, the kind that requires investigation and fact-checking and in-depth knowledge -- costs money to produce. I'd rather pay for a subscription to have access to that kind of work, that just get the free clickbait.
[Post New]10/12/2020 12:51
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
jsmith123 wrote:People are just accustomed to getting online services for free. And there are several "news" services out there that are ad supported or have other financial models.

I wish people would just pay for good journalism. It would probably reduce click bait.


+1

A reminder that if you aren't paying, you're the product. People get mad that articles are behind paywalls, but they also complain about the quality of contemporary journalism. Good journalism, the kind that requires investigation and fact-checking and in-depth knowledge -- costs money to produce. I'd rather pay for a subscription to have access to that kind of work, that just get the free clickbait.


Agree 100%. I happily pay for the Post. People refusing to pay for good journalism is one of the things that nearly killed the whole industry!
[Post New]10/12/2020 13:07
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I don't get a home delivery. But for some reason when I get a newspaper I read it front to back. Online is just weird to me, much prefer the physical paper.


+1
[Post New]10/12/2020 13:27
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
jsmith123 wrote:People are just accustomed to getting online services for free. And there are several "news" services out there that are ad supported or have other financial models.

I wish people would just pay for good journalism. It would probably reduce click bait.


+1

A reminder that if you aren't paying, you're the product. People get mad that articles are behind paywalls, but they also complain about the quality of contemporary journalism. Good journalism, the kind that requires investigation and fact-checking and in-depth knowledge -- costs money to produce. I'd rather pay for a subscription to have access to that kind of work, that just get the free clickbait.


Newspapers have always made the bulk of their profit from advertising, not from paid subscriptions.

Seems kind of silly for me to pay to see ads.
[Post New]10/12/2020 14:10
quote
Anonymous
Publications that are heavily pay walled shouldn't be able to endlessly spam their clickbait / headlines into things like the FB news viewer. It's really that simple. I will pay for one publication. I will not pay for 15 of them.
[Post New]10/12/2020 14:34
quote
Anonymous
There’s good browsing tools and add-ons you can use to block tracking. And tracking is done on WaPo’s site as well for the purposes of advertising, even if you pay. So as for subscribing, why pay when I can get my news for free, while blocking advertising?
[Post New]10/12/2020 14:42
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsmith123 wrote:People are just accustomed to getting online services for free. And there are several "news" services out there that are ad supported or have other financial models.

I wish people would just pay for good journalism. It would probably reduce click bait.


+1

A reminder that if you aren't paying, you're the product. People get mad that articles are behind paywalls, but they also complain about the quality of contemporary journalism. Good journalism, the kind that requires investigation and fact-checking and in-depth knowledge -- costs money to produce. I'd rather pay for a subscription to have access to that kind of work, that just get the free clickbait.


Agree 100%. I happily pay for the Post. People refusing to pay for good journalism is one of the things that nearly killed the whole industry!


Not even close to true. The cost of printing and delivering the paper was more than the subscription. It was always the ads.


[Post New]10/12/2020 14:51
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsmith123 wrote:People are just accustomed to getting online services for free. And there are several "news" services out there that are ad supported or have other financial models.

I wish people would just pay for good journalism. It would probably reduce click bait.


+1

A reminder that if you aren't paying, you're the product. People get mad that articles are behind paywalls, but they also complain about the quality of contemporary journalism. Good journalism, the kind that requires investigation and fact-checking and in-depth knowledge -- costs money to produce. I'd rather pay for a subscription to have access to that kind of work, that just get the free clickbait.


Newspapers have always made the bulk of their profit from advertising, not from paid subscriptions.

Seems kind of silly for me to pay to see ads.


But for advertising, they advertisers pay based on the number of eyes expected on the paper, which is paid subscribers. I tried to switch to online only, but they gave me a rate below that to stay a delivery customer. They need the numbers.
[Post New]10/12/2020 14:57
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Publications that are heavily pay walled shouldn't be able to endlessly spam their clickbait / headlines into things like the FB news viewer. It's really that simple. I will pay for one publication. I will not pay for 15 of them.


Yep, this is my problem with newspaper paywalls. In digital form, I think many people find articles to read from social media, blogs and new aggregators. It's not like a physical paper, where you might sit down and page through the whole newspaper.

I think people are willing to pay for news, but it's going to need to work more like Spotify than traditional newspaper subscriptions.
[Post New]10/12/2020 15:55
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Publications that are heavily pay walled shouldn't be able to endlessly spam their clickbait / headlines into things like the FB news viewer. It's really that simple. I will pay for one publication. I will not pay for 15 of them.


Yep, this is my problem with newspaper paywalls. In digital form, I think many people find articles to read from social media, blogs and new aggregators. It's not like a physical paper, where you might sit down and page through the whole newspaper.

I think people are willing to pay for news, but it's going to need to work more like Spotify than traditional newspaper subscriptions.


That would be fantastic! I currently pay for the Washington Post, New York Times (plus extra for the crossword, argh), the Atlantic, WAMU, and Popville. I gave up Slate and the Daily Beast but I miss them. I want to support everyone's work but it has to end somewhere.
[Post New]10/12/2020 16:06
quote
Anonymous
Because they are low class.
post reply Forum Index » Off-Topic
Message Quick Reply
Go to: 

Search   Recent Topics   Hottest Topics