Murdoch’s Subscription Scheme Will Kill Times Online

[Deadmanwalking_05]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-charging.html

From June, customers will be able to view www.thetimes.co.uk and www.thesundaytimes.co.uk, for a charge of £1 for a day's access or £2 for a week's subscription.

Payment will give readers access to both sites. The weekly subscription will also give access to certain new applications.

Use of the digital services will be included in the seven-day subscriptions of print customers to The Times and The Sunday Times.

Rebekah Brooks, chief executive of The Sun's parent company News International, said: "At a defining moment for journalism, this is a crucial step towards making the business of news an economically exciting proposition.

"We are proud of our journalism and unashamed to say that we believe it has value...

[Entropic]

I don't blame them for doing this. Seriously, advertising money doesn't pay as well as it used too, and editorial staff aren't cheap.

That being said, I won't use their services. I get too much of my news from Twitter, blogs, forums, and other social media to really see a justification for buying a subscription.

Edit: Wait a minute... Deadman posted this? WTF bizzaro world am I in, where he posts something relatively relevant.

[Raptor]

If I have to pay, I prefer having an actual paper. Still have the BBC at least.

[Ben Lahnger]

*doubletake* (re: Deadman's relevant post)

This is an ongoing trend as newspapers around the world find their print subscriptions and revenues falling ... papers are slow and unable to keep up with the immediacy of television and internet news sources. Some will try to transition to subscription based websites (with mixed results - the only shining success I'm aware of is The Wall Street Journal) while others will morph into advertising-based free sites. Many will fail and just go away.

The jury's still out on The Times of London, but newspapers are dying. Some of them just don't know it yet.

[Saya]

I don't think any other websites would do this, don't they all steal from each other anyway? Like you notice when you read a story on lets say MSNBC under the article it will say something like "by Peter Mansbridge, Associate Press" and ten other websites have the exact same article?

So as long as Associated Press is free I think we're good.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Entropic

I don't blame them for doing this. Seriously, advertising money doesn't pay as well as it used too, and editorial staff aren't cheap.

That being said, I won't use their services. I get too much of my news from Twitter, blogs, forums, and other social media to really see a justification for buying a subscription.

Edit: Wait a minute... Deadman posted this? WTF bizzaro world am I in, where he posts something relatively relevant.

Ever stop and think that maybe a good portion of the stuff I post on here is relevant,and maybe the rest of you are too caught up in the mind fuck division games of Big Gov to notice?

[Ben Lahnger]

Nope ... that never occurred to me at all. Cause that whole mind-fuck by big government thing you just laid out there is a bunch of bullshit. As is that claim about the majority of your posts being relevant, since most of your posts are right-wing, militia-fomenting propaganda being posted on a predominantly liberal/progressive bulletin board. Nope, can't see the relevancy there.

Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you on your way out.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Nope ... that never occurred to me at all. Cause that whole mind-fuck by big government thing you just laid out there is a bunch of bullshit. As is that claim about the majority of your posts being relevant, since most of your posts are right-wing, militia-fomenting propaganda being posted on a predominantly liberal/progressive bulletin board. Nope, can't see the relevancy there.

Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you on your way out.

That says it all right there.

[Entropic]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Ever stop and think that maybe a good portion of the stuff I post on here is relevant,and maybe the rest of you are too caught up in the mind fuck division games of Big Gov to notice?

Yes.

And after I stopped laughing, I decided I couldn't take you seriously.

How do you know that you aren't the one who is caught up in the "mind fuck division games of Big Gov"? Think about it: This board is predominantly anti-authoritarian with a good portion of the users being well-educated anarchists. With the exception of a few members, most people here don't support a strong state at all.

With all of the anti-authoritarianism here, don't you find it odd that you're the only one who has seen the light and deemed that we're the ones following big government?