Newspapers Want Consumers To Pay For Online Content

It is fashionable to blame the recession on all of your business woes. Case in point is GM. All of a sudden sales are down because of the recession. But what we learn later is that GM had been losing millions and next came billions of dollars before the recession even hit. It was piss poor business decisions that got these folks into trouble not the recession.

The same appears with the print media folks. All of a sudden it is the recession that is causing their woes. Horse pucky! Newspapers have been in trouble before the recession even got started. The news folks thought that they had a winning combination of providing free content and make money on the ads that filled their web sites. Unfortunately this didn’t work out the way they wanted and when ad revenues shrank, some papers faded away.

The AP is running around finger pointing at everyone, including we consumers, and now demands payment to get the news. They cite the fact that folks pay for cable TV, cell phones, so why not the news? Interesting. There is only one minor problem. As Google has stated, piss off the consumers and you will end up with a back lash. 

In an article over at the N.Y. Times they report the following:

“People reading news for free on the Web, that’s got to change,” Mr. Murdoch said last week at a cable industry conference in Washington.

The Associated Press said on Monday that it intended to police the use of news articles linked on countless Web sites, where many consumers read them free, to make sure the sites shared advertising revenue with those who created the material.

But from networks selling downloads of TV shows, to music companies trying to curb file-sharing, to struggling newspapers and magazines, the make-or-break question is this: How do you get consumers to pay for something they have grown used to getting free?

Well Murdoch old boy. It is you and your news organization that will need to change. The American people are sick and tired of having to PAY to bail out you business people who have made bad decisions. Heh Murdoch? Do you really think any of us gives a rats ass about you or your silly ideas? 

There is a new sheriff in town and the people are in a hanging mood. Go ahead Murdoch. Make our day! LOL

But what do you think? 

Comments welcome.

Source.

Article Written by

I have been writing for LockerGnome since relocating to Missouri seven years ago, where I continue to be a technology enthusiast who enjoys playing with the newest and latest gadgets.

  • http://www.ronknights.com Ron Knights

    I gave up cable tv because I can get what I want online for free!

    If I watched TV, I’d get news for free.

    I won’t pay for news.

    I don’t read newspapers.

  • Bob

    How to get people to pay for which was once “free” ?

    Not exactly the same comparison, but Bill Gates found a winning combination, for most honest folks.

    And, by the way, Internet Content is NOT Free!! Internet Access is not Free for many of us. We have to pay for Internet Access, Internet tools (Computers, modems, etc.) . Pay ISP’s and for some Toll charges to their Telco. The we get bombarded by those self-same “providers” with a perpetual stream of Ads. Like Google offers a pop-up blocker that blocks all ads EXCEPT their own.

    The cost, perhaps no ADDITIONAL fees, but I thought, for example, NY Times provided teaser copy, but to read the article has a fee attached to it?

    It appears the NY Times hasn’t been paying attention, but they bought the Boston Globe cheap because BG was in financial trouble. Boston “Used” to support 5 major papers: Globe, Traveller, Herald, American and Christian Science Monitor, plus the magazine Saturday Evening Post. TV killed off most newspapers inn Boston.

    Now with 95% of all USA News media owned by 5 men, is it no wonder we have limited news offerings?

    Bob

  • Pingback: Top 5 Things I’ll Pay for on the Web : Words + Pictures = Web