UK Murdoch newspapers unveil pay-for websites

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-technology/uk-murdoch-newspapers-unveil-payfor-websites-20100526-wbbb.html

by tshtf • 16 years ago

5 5 16 years ago

news.smh.com.au

hugh32• 16 years ago

It will be interesting to see what happens. It's very easy for us savvy types to predict that it won't work based on extrapolating from our own browsing habits, but surely there must be some people willing to pay for the Times.

Now it's worth noting that this story is from the Sydney Morning Herald, part of the Fairfax company which owns all the newspapers in Australia that aren't owned by Murdoch. The really interesting part of this article is at the bottom:

This story is sourced direct from an overseas news agency as an additional service to readers. Spelling follows North American usage, along with foreign currency and measurement units.

or in other words, "we're not even going to spend two minutes editing trying to add value to the AFP news stories we reprint any more". This seems to undermine the idea that an online newspaper is something worth paying for.

ErrantX• 16 years ago

The times is probably the paper most likely to succeed here - even so it is a very very slim chance.

In the uk the major problem such schemes face is that the BBC is extremely good for daily news and current events. Which means they have to sell the editorial content... Strikes me as much more difficult.

hugh32• 16 years ago

It could be a success even if they don't sell any actual online newspapers. You'll notice that the price for one-day access to the Times online is one pound, exactly the same as the cover price of the printed version.

The idea, then, is not so much to sell subscriptions but to anchor in people's minds the idea that a newspaper like the Times is something worth paying a pound for. People will be more inclined to pick up a printed newspaper to read on the train if they're not thinking "gee, I could read exactly the same thing online for free, what's the point?"

Actually if you think of it as a way of driving people back to printed newspapers, rather than as a new revenue stream in itself, it starts to make a hell of a lot of sense.

bugschivers• 16 years ago

I had to comment, because the BBC is anything BUT "extremely good for daily news and current events" It is obsessed with sensationalism and sound-bites and little actual content, you can read any of this stuff anywhere else and get as good a commentary. I recently visited the BBC news site again, after a hiatus of several months, for coverage of the recent elections, it astounds me how anyone can NOT see the rubbish that that site churns out. If you get all of your news updates from the BBC, I would urge you to explore other news sources, no one source can be considered wholly reliable, but at least you will get different points of view.

jorgecastillo• 16 years ago

I already have to many feeds, If I had to pay for the access to any site I would rather stop reading such site than pay. It would be even better for me since I would waste less time on the internet.

UK Murdoch newspapers unveil pay-for websites

Related Stories