Pay Walls

[Tom]

Rarely, journalists and newspaper owners are all hoping that Rupert Murdoch succeeds. He wants to build Pay Walls so that people have to make micropayments to view content on the Sun, the Times, the New York Post and the Australian. As of today, the Wiki entry views Pay Walls as a thing of the past "The Wall Street Journal is the last major newspaper in the USA to still have its website behind a pay wall. The Journal has almost one million paying online readers, which generates about $65 million a year." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay_wall

[kae101]

David did tell us of the successful turn around of the Evening Standard when it made its content free to all. It seems it literally turned around its fortune by cutting the price.

It seems so hit and miss who can demand a fee for their work and who can't.

I personally have no newspaper loyalty. I am very aware that every single one of them is telling it from a view point and from them I simply take on the facts and allow myself to form my own opinion.

If Rupert (who's mother is 100 and is the scariest looking woman ever) does succeed then I will simply seek free avenues for aquiring the news (someone will always find a way!). I refuse to pay for the opinion of Rupert's minions. Just give me the facts.

KA

[Tom]

I agree about the hit and miss.
Also, I have no loyalty to newspapers - but I do to columnists and think that I might pay for access to them. At present I am reluctant to buy papers when I only really want to read the comment sections, because I get the facts from other sources.
Has the Standard started making money since it went free? I had not heard that.

[francis]

Not sure if you've seen this, but it was all over my Twitter stream yesterday:
Paywall proponents, take note: Only 35 people pay for Newsday.com (http://econsultancy.com/blog/5309-newsday-has-35-new-subscribers-since-october)