| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Newspaper charging website subscription fee
Mark Davis, Photographer
 |
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 5:14 AM on 03.04.08 |
| ->> Our local daily paper began charging a subscription fee to read their online edition, if the reader doesn't have a subscription to the printed edition. I've read several complaints because other area news outlets do not charge a fee. How does your newspaper handle website content, is it free or does it require a subscription? |
|
Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 6:35 AM on 03.04.08 |
| ->> Free for today and yesterday, you have to be either a home subscriber or pay a separate fee to access anything older than that. Our publisher says that web readership drops 80% for papers that charge a subscription fee ... or maybe it's 60% ... |
|
Dave Prelosky, Photographer
 |
Lower Burrell | Pa | US | Posted: 6:57 AM on 03.04.08 |
| ->> We have two-tier delivery of web cntent. Anyone can get at the home page with 1 graf summaries. To see the complete story with photos requires a monthly subscription - I believe it ads $3 to a subscription. I never asked if there's a standalone price for vacationers and such. |
|
Kevin Johnston, Photographer
 |
Oden | MI | USA | Posted: 8:37 AM on 03.04.08 |
->> One weekly in my area charges an annual web subscription fee and the daily charges for their full e-edition if the viewer is not a print subscibers.
I don't understand why everybody doesn't. Maybe if more did we wouldn't have as many threads here about newsroom cuts as we do. |
|
Walter Calahan, Photographer
|
Westminster | MD | USA | Posted: 8:38 AM on 03.04.08 |
->> That will fail.
Did for the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.
Salon still struggles with a two tier system.
Web publishers make their money from advertising. |
|
Les Stukenberg, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Prescott Valley | AZ | USA | Posted: 9:08 AM on 03.04.08 |
| ->> We had a "pay for" online subscription for an exact copy of the paper, ads and all, for about a year. Along with this we had an abbreviated story version on a separate web site. We recently changed and now have one primary website (http://www.dcourier.com) and the exact copy web paper is free... |
|
Stan Gilliland, Photographer
 |
Cary | NC | USA | Posted: 11:04 AM on 03.04.08 |
| ->> It is interesting to note the similarity between newspapers failing to see the value in their online editions early on and photographers making their money charging only for prints. If newspapers (as an industry) had come up with a reasonable way to charge for their online product when they first came online, they wouldn't be dismissed so easily now. If photographers had charged creative fees instead of asking $X for an 8x10 print back before digital, customers wouldn't be so confused about why you are charging them $20 for an 8x10, when they can get an 8x10 for a buck at the corner drugstore. |
|
Wesley R. Bush, Photographer
 |
Nashville | TN | U.S. | Posted: 11:30 AM on 03.04.08 |
| ->> I disagree that it'll fail at the local paper level. Sure, if a national paper charges, they will lose readers because the competition gives theirs away free. But where are the readers going to find out about the high school game last night? Smaller papers fight for every subscription they have. Putting a free version online, to me, has never made sense. And I understand people disagree with me on this, but I've had tons of people tell me they won't pay for a paper when they can get it online for free. Not that I blame them. It doesn't make sense to, if the top stories are all they read anyway. To me, running free, local online versions is the same as the photographers who give their photos away for free. |
|
Richard Uhlhorn, Photographer
 |
Chelan Falls | WA | USA | Posted: 11:47 AM on 03.04.08 |
->> It has failed in our region also. The Wenatchee World has a two-tier system, but most of the important news is free along with their new video section and photos of the day. http://www.wenworld.com
While web advertising is only about 1/5 as expensive as print advertising, newspapers have to figure out how to maximize their advertising on the web which will happen when they finally figure out how to attract the readership to make their on-line advertising viable.
Local sports coverage is probably one of the mose viable ways to attract readership especially when the web edition posts more than one photo of an event.
We've experimented a lot with http://www.golakechelan.com sports for over three years now and advertisers are more than happy to sponsor and advertise to support their local teams because they are advertising directly to the customer base they need... the parents. |
|
Eric Francis, Photographer
 |
Omaha | NE | United States | Posted: 11:49 AM on 03.04.08 |
->> "If photographers had charged creative fees instead of asking $X for an 8x10 print back before digital, customers wouldn't be so confused about why you are charging them $20 for an 8x10, when they can get an 8x10 for a buck at the corner drugstore."
if this is the case, I'd say that photographer needs to find another business if his/her clients can't tell the difference the two. |
|
Bryan Curtis, Photographer
|
Plainville | CT | USA | Posted: 12:27 PM on 03.04.08 |
->> Do papers struggle to find advertising for their websites? (I answered that question when I clicked Richard's first link, http://www.wenworld.com and scrolled down to read the online version of the paper, clicked the link and saw the open banner ad across the top of the page) If more people are clicking than reading, can't they prove the value in online advertising? What am I missing?
What if papers didn't give everything away online and used their websites to preview the paper and encourage the reader to pick up the whole edition? Kind of use their website as an advertisement for that day's edition. I hear a lot of people say they don't buy the paper because there is nothing in it. (We know job cuts is the reason for that, but that's a whole different thread) If papers prove their value to the viewer/reader on their website, more people might be willing to pick it up that day on their way to/from work, school, etc. If they do that enough with consistent quality, they may grab more subscribers. But if you give it all away for free online, why pay for a subscription? |
|
Jason Jump, Photographer
 |
Humble | TX | USA | Posted: 4:21 PM on 03.04.08 |
->> "I disagree that it'll fail at the local paper level. Sure, if a national paper charges, they will lose readers because the competition gives theirs away free. But where are the readers going to find out about the high school game last night? Smaller papers fight for every subscription they have. Putting a free version online, to me, has never made sense. And I understand people disagree with me on this, but I've had tons of people tell me they won't pay for a paper when they can get it online for free. Not that I blame them. It doesn't make sense to, if the top stories are all they read anyway. To me, running free, local online versions is the same as the photographers who give their photos away for free."
I don't have a "print" version, but I have been publishing an online newspaper for five years now that covers Christian high school athletic events across the state of Texas (started out just covering the greater Houston area) and we have always struggled gaining subscribers to our website.
We started out by publishing the opening paragraph of our stories with a small 2x2 thumbnail on the front page and sports pages. Now we run larger photos on the front page and just headlines for our stories.
While the major newspapers and even the smaller community papers don't do a great job of covering Christian high school athletic events people will still settle for just a box score over paying for a full story with photos unfortunatley.
To me it's just like the debate about non-pros giving away their work. In my experience free has ALWAYS beat out quality work.
I am actually a one-man band so I don't have much time to solicit advertising, but if I had advertising dollars I wouldn't charge for our content as I think it would help bring more folks to our site, which means higher ad rates.
Just my .02 and some say its not worth that :). |
|
Kevin Johnston, Photographer
|
Oden | MI | USA | Posted: 2:02 PM on 03.05.08 |
| ->> Does anyone have any first hand knowledge of a newspaper website that, as a stand alone item, brings in enough ad revenue to justify its being free? |
|
Kevin Johnston, Photographer
|
Oden | MI | USA | Posted: 2:08 PM on 03.05.08 |
->> ..and
For the sake of discussion, if you worked at a daily that sold 20,000 print copies a day ten years ago, how many print copies is that paper selling each day now?
(if two trains both leave....) |
|
Mark Buffalo, Photographer
 |
Lonoke | AR | USA | Posted: 2:19 PM on 03.05.08 |
| ->> the state paper in arkansas still charges for their website and has for several years. |
|
David Brooks, Photographer
 |
San Diego | CA | USA | Posted: 3:34 PM on 03.05.08 |
->> Kevin-
Presently, at least for the next month or so, the website of the San Diego Union-Tribune supports itself, completely separate from the papers finance budget. The site supports a staff of about 75 people, we are consistently ranked in the top 20 of best read newspaper sites in the country, we draw well over 1 million in traffic daily, over 30 million a month. It's not the best looking site but in San Diego we are the main show. In a town of over 3 million those are good numbers. Ad customers buy big box ads for the homepage in conjunction with print ads. For the most part our site is free. We have a feature called subscriber perks, for paid subscibers, where they supposedly get a little more in content, but it hasn't done well recently, I believe it will be phased out. Our site has existed since 1996.
My company has been affected by the ongoing descent in print circulation and we've experienced lay-offs and buyouts over the last few months across every department except the website. Now the paper is going through a "re-organization" where we will no longer be a publishing or print company, fully integrating print and web, we will be a media company. None of us know how this will play out. At least for now, I'm still a staffer and use a camera for a living.
David |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
 |
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 1:45 PM on 03.06.08 |
->> Jason,
How much do you charge for access? How many subscribers do you have?
--Mark |
|
William Jurasz, Photographer, Assistant
|
Cedar Park | TX | USA | Posted: 2:28 PM on 03.06.08 |
| ->> I notice both the NY Times and the WSJ, and a few other newspapers, can buy monthly subscriptions through Amazon's new Kindle eBook reader and service. I'm wondering how that is working out for them. Personally I subscribe to Scientific American digitally, as well as to a professional society publication. My only gripe with both is the PDF's are still formatted to fit paper, which makes them cumbersome to read on a screen. I'm wondering if the same thing is true of the Kindle or website subscriptions. |
|
Colin Corneau, Photographer
|
Brandon | MB | Canada | Posted: 7:11 PM on 03.06.08 |
->> Charging is moronic in 2008.
I can get BBC World News for free. Unless you can top that, it's a futile gesture that is pennywise and pound-foolish. |
|
Mark Davis, Photographer
|
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 6:46 PM on 03.07.08 |
->> I think our local paper circ is down to 20,000 readers from 30 to 32k 10 years ago. I may be off a little but that's close. They charge $7 to read online content only, or $11+ for print and online subscription.
Interestingly, all other area newspaper and TV media website content is free. |
|
Mike Deal, Photographer
|
Winnipeg | mb | Canada | Posted: 2:28 AM on 03.08.08 |
->> I don't get it... the number of readers subscribing to newspapers are dropping like a stone and people are thinking that they should attach their websites to that sinking ship?
Do you really think that subscriptions will go UP if you force people to subscribe to get access to your website? Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense to me.
Our papers website was closed to non-subscribers until a year or so ago and since we opened it up we have seen a phenomenal growth in viewership. More viewers = more money. Advertisers look at how many hits your website gets... no hits no advertisers.
Remember that the money from subscriptions really doesn't pay your salaries, it pays for the distribution of the printed paper. At least I hope that the cost of subscription covers distribution. Ad sales pay the salaries. |
|
Mark Davis, Photographer
|
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 5:34 PM on 03.08.08 |
->> Interestingly, the issue to charge, or offer it free, is about 50-50 for or against.
After reading the link, according to Mr Hussman, print circulation goes down with free content. I have researched website marketing for the last couple years. I see the decision to charge for newspaper content is a result of not having complete knowledge of how web marketing works. More so when all other local news outlets are offering free content as in our local area. Free content with proper web marketing should bring in much more income than charging a subscription fee. Its just knowing how. Simply, website marketing can't be compared to print media marketing and that's what many newspaper publishers are doing. They know traditional marketing well, but website marketing is new and unknown to them. Further, how can attempting to force someone to subscribe increase revenue when all competitors offer it free? No one will go for that. For example: there is a local murder trial on-going in our community. The local paper, which just started charging a fee, posts a brief update at 5 pm the same day or a story the following morning. Meanwhile, an area TV station updates from the courtroom with a reporter's blog every two hours. The newspaper information isn't anywhere close to what the TV station is providing. While I understand TV and newspapers are different, when their website's offer the same print content they become competitors. |
|
Jason Jump, Photographer
|
Humble | TX | USA | Posted: 10:06 AM on 03.11.08 |
->> >>Jason
>>How much do you charge for access? How many subscribers do you have?
Mark sorry I haven't been on the site lately and just saw your questions. I have several different subscription rates which start with six-month subscription at 49.95 I believe. Then we have a 1-year plan 79.95 and then we to 2-year, 3-year and 4-year plans.
We also have a 7-day "trial" subscription for 9.95.
Last year we offered a 3-month plan for 34.95, but did away with that this year.
I've never had more than 100 subscribers during a year in any of my five years. |
|
|| Sponsor Special Deals
We BUY & TRADE you OLD Gear
|
Available from:
Adorama Camera
|
Price: $0.00 |
Notes:
We all have some cameras & lenses sitting around collecting dust right?...Or you work at a Newspaper that has downsized?...What to do with your excess photographic equipment? Adorama's Used Dept is looking for your used gear to purchase or take in trade. Contact me directly jsnyder@adorama.com or 1-800-223-2500 X2435 and I can fill you in on the details. Cash in your pocket is better than sitting on the shelf, right?
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|
