PDA

View Full Version : The newspaper industry.


Steve
05-07-2009, 01:12 PM
Rupert Murdoch has said he plans on starting to charge for access to his internet news content. I say to Rupert, good for you and good luck. For too long news has been dominated by these media conglomerates. They decide what we will hear and what we won't. They decide what is news worthy.

Well as the internet grows and grows, we no longer need newspapers for our news. They used to dominate local advertising, now we no longer need them to advertise. There are plenty of sites that offer free classifieds.

Now you can become a news media distributor at the smallest geographic level and still be read globally. It's a fantastic time to be alive! You can create news about your classroom, about your school, about your neighborhood, about your town all with minimal cost to you.

I will miss newspapers as much as I missed AT&T dominating the phone industry. Which is to say, not at all.

Murdoch: Web sites to charge for content (http://www.cnn.com/2009/BUSINESS/05/07/murdoch.web.content/index.html) - But he said the challenge for media organizations was finding a balance between advertising and subscription revenues and figuring out how to charge for content without alienating existing users - which could lead to Web sites offering tiered levels of free and paid-for material.

"I suspect within any readership there is a small slice - maybe three percent - that is willing to pay. News organizations are going to have to find a way of getting money from that slice without driving away everybody else," Benton said.

StartALawnCareBusiness
05-07-2009, 01:40 PM
"Freedom of the press is great...if you happen to own a press."


Like the traditional music industry, the newspaper industry has been in denial for well over a decade. Do you know any statistics of the number of people purchasing music online versus getting it for free? Do you think 3% is an accurate estimate for the number of people who will pay for their online subscriptions?

Keith

Steve
05-07-2009, 03:41 PM
Do you know any statistics of the number of people purchasing music online versus getting it for free? Do you think 3% is an accurate estimate for the number of people who will pay for their online subscriptions?

I don't know the statistics. It's possible 3% might be true, but I guess they won't know until they experiment. I know they are desperately trying to save what they have however what they have may not be worth much.

Why should a band sign with a label when they can do it all themselves?

Why should a writer work for a newspaper when they can do it themselves and do just as well (potentially at least).

swstout
05-07-2009, 04:32 PM
Rupert Murdoch has said he plans on starting to charge for access to his internet news content. I say to Rupert, good for you and good luck. For too long news has been dominated by these media conglomerates. They decide what we will hear and what we won't. They decide what is news worthy.

This is a smoke screen! The News Corporation already dominates the news in the US. It dominates the cable TV news resources. Fox news has more viewers than ABC, CBS, MCNBC, and CNN combined (all popular pay TV channels). The Fox Business Channel, only in operatin less than a year is already dominating the business news world. He would not risk harming the popularity of them unless the other "News Entities" did so

As fas as newspapers in the US, News Corp only has two. The New York Post and the Wall Street Journal and the WSJ already charges a membership.

To entice only 3% to "Pay For The Service" is obserd! News Corp already dominates the top advertising dollars and that is why they are still growing . I think he is ust trying to get the others to try to charge for internet news programs. News Corp is growing while all the rest are failing. The American people are looking for News, not propoganda. Fair and Balanced is winning! Charging extra will be a costly endever for both popularity and profit.

Steve

StartALawnCareBusiness
05-07-2009, 11:16 PM
NewsCorp also owns Myspace.

SuperiorPower
05-08-2009, 02:47 AM
News corps do dominate the advertising industry but recently they have noticed that people are going away from printed media like newspapers. Everyone, including the WSJ and New York Times are losing subscribers so fast it is terrible. A local news paper (and not a small one) is hurting so bad that they are advertising on TV to "think in ink". This is a catchy slogan but I am not sure that they will be able to really get that many customers from advertising on TV.

Like said, newspapers are hurting. TV and other technologically advanced news media is doing record business.

What do you all think?

Steve
05-08-2009, 05:39 AM
A local news paper (and not a small one) is hurting so bad that they are advertising on TV to "think in ink". This is a catchy slogan but I am not sure that they will be able to really get that many customers from advertising on TV.

I don't think so either. Good for them for trying but you can't turn the tide of this.

I think he is ust trying to get the others to try to charge for internet news programs.

I agree. If he could only get the other 'news' outlets to charge, then he hopes he could get the public to accept paying for news.

It's a different world now.

They have never been in a position where they couldn't dictate to the customers the way it will be. So now they are scrambling and going out of business. It's like the yellow pages as well. They just can't believe they no longer dominate the local business advertising market. I can't remember the last time I used the yellow pages. In fact, I wish they didn't deliver them to me anymore because they are a pain to get rid of.