Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Safety Ryan Clark's Motivational Workout

The Globe Will Make You Pay For Online Content

The Herald reports:

The Boston Globe will soon begin charging for its Web site, publisher P. Steven Ainsley told the paper's union bosses yesterday as the Globe's parent New York Times [NYT] Co. confirmed in a regulatory filing that the money-losing Hub broadsheet is for sale.

Boston Sports Media Watch looks at the story as well.

There have been a lot of rumblings recently that more and more newspapers and news outlets are going to attempt to raise their falling fortunes by limiting access to their online work and charging readers a fee to access and read it. An Associated Press (another news agency looking to get more protective of their content) article this morning reports that News Corp.’s newspapers will also soon be charging for content. 

While I can see that their logic in not wishing to keep giving away their content and work for free, I have my doubts as to whether this is going to be successful.  The AP article above has Rupert Murdoch pointing to the Wall Street Journal and WSJ.com as a successful model for paid content that the rest of News Corp. will be trying to emulate.

Note: In case you were wondering, CelticsBlog has no plans of ever going into the pay-for-content business.

Poll
Would you pay for online Globe content?
Yes
86 votes
No
1225 votes

1311 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 13 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I think that’s going to be a train wreck.

by Marqui on Aug 7, 2009 9:38 PM EDT reply actions  

BIG MISTAKE… There are enough free sport information outlets to get info from. I’ll go back to buying a newspaper before I pay for content online!!

by giantfollower on Aug 7, 2009 9:55 PM EDT reply actions  

I agree

Very Big mistake, people are just going to read the Herald now.

Standing up for the little People

PS: I am actually from Boston.

by Champzilla on Aug 7, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Newspapers missed their chance to charge for online content 10 years ago. Now, with blogs specializing in specific sports, and teams, the information we crave will be readily available with little-to-no difference in quality. If anything, the quality is even better on well-run blogs (such as this one).

The only way charging for online content would be feasible for newspapers, specifically the sports section, is if franchises and leagues somehow colluded to exclude non-traditional media from covering the games in person. Even then I still don’t think this will succeed.

I specializes in grammar fail.

by a tommy point on Aug 7, 2009 10:25 PM EDT reply actions  

The globe isn’t worth it. I would rather read the NYT anyway.

by guava_wrench on Aug 7, 2009 10:43 PM EDT reply actions  

This is in relation to Ruper Murdoch making his online content subscription based right?

by Jackson34 on Aug 7, 2009 10:51 PM EDT reply actions  

No Chance

I wouldn’t pay the Globe, Herald or any website for news. I like the Globe online sports section but not enough to pay for it. This is a bad idea that will fail.

by Marco33 on Aug 7, 2009 11:23 PM EDT reply actions  

The poll as of this post says it all..

Some people would consider it the beginning of the end.

I think it’s closer to the end of the end. : )

by Tai on Aug 8, 2009 2:29 AM EDT reply actions  

For sports content, probably not, but

if the newspaper industry can’t figure out how to make money off what they produce, namely news content and opinion, newspapers will become extinct.

Do you want your local and state government to operate without local papers as watchdogs? Or do you trust the government to just put out information, which blogs can then digest? It costs money to send reporters to city hall, zoning meetings, state houses, etc.

Cragislist has cut out one leg of the newspaper industry – classified ads. This bad economy is threatening the other, display ads. Papers are cutting reporting and editing jobs like crazy. If I have to pay $20 a month on the internet to insure that my local statewide daily stays in business, I will do it.

by TripleOT on Aug 8, 2009 2:41 AM EDT reply actions  

Excellent Post TripleOT

To have a free society you need a free press— aand lots of it. The reporting on TV and on web-based media is almost uniformly shallow. Nothing provides in-depth investigative coverage like a good newspaper.

I get the Globe via home delivery and those prices have gone through the roof asa well: from $31 a month to $47 per month in less than a year. But I will continue to pay tht as well.

by Brickowski on Aug 8, 2009 6:38 AM EDT reply actions  

I Agree Triple OT

The 93% that say “No” contain some true hardliners, no doubt, but most WILL fall into paying a penny a click or an annual fee or whatever. I am to the right of virtually every writer the Globe publishes (and I’m not very right) except Jeff Jacoby so why would I care if it goes down. Answer, see Brickowski above, the Globe’s Spotlight Team is absolutely essential. Corrupt politicians, lazy firemen, greedy drug companies etc have all had their butts kicked in public and we can’t lose that or the future gets darker indeed.

by Wildblu1 on Aug 8, 2009 9:54 AM EDT reply actions  

Agree 100%

Newspapers do a crappy job of covering local politics, but they’re the ONLY thing that even tries.

The lack of information and investigative reporting about local government is a serious social problem.

I doubt charging for online content will work, though. Newspapers have been so mismanaged for so long that they’ve squandered their franchises.

"People don't understand, if you can't live the rest of your life off one year in the NBA, you can't live off 21." -- Keon Clark

by Eeyore III on Aug 8, 2009 10:40 AM EDT reply actions  

Never

I would never pay for online content or even the paper itself. If there’s a copy at the gym I might take a look. But I can find any information elsewhere. (like here) The opinion articles aren’t important. And politically, all they seem to do is tell us how great Obama is. So much for being a watchdog.

by slamdunk1 on Aug 8, 2009 11:08 AM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

CelticsBlog is a growing interactive community dedicated to providing fresh, comprehensive coverage of the Boston Celtics.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
"We really have only 2 options to keep winning."
Small
Celtics vs. Heat - ECF Matchup
Small
How Avery Bradley's absence affects everyone else
Small
Thoughts on Celtics vs. Heat
Small
Already Doubting The Celtics?
Small
Start Pavlovic over Ray to cover Dirty Wade
Small
Why we can beat the heat
Mchale_small
Can the C's Cool Down the Heat?
Small
Fourth Quarter of Game 7: A Glimpse of the Future with Rondo?
Small
Is Rondo out of his mind? Or just on some other level?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


CEO

Shamrock-blk-trans_small Jeff Clark

Authors/Editors

Hoosiers-dvdcover_small Roy_Hobbs

300h_small Wide Load

Big_4_small Jimmy Toscano

Leon_powe_small Green17

Ud_small Tom Bellinger

Grawful3_small Kiorrik

Authors/Mods

1_koolaid_avi_small FLCeltsFan

Po3_small Master Po

Images_small Bent

Green_avatar_small Fafnir

Small Tom Halzack

N23879518902_8484_small Jon Duke - CSL

Small jose3030

5bill_small Jack Jemsek

Small wjsy

Small Ryan Desmarais

250_small Brendan O'Hare

1119816_small JoshZavadil

Small TLayman

Small Anthony_Bruzzese

Small theoriginalhagrid

Sheed_small evansclinchy

Moderators

Photo_14_small Steve Weinman

Too_much_coffe_man_small Edgar

Small Chris72

Small thirstyboots18

Small CfanMissippi