Posted on 05/29/2012 11:02:23 AM PDT by Mozilla
McClatchy Co., one of the nation’s largest newspaper publishers, is planning to introduce online paywalls at its newspaper Web sites, according to an internal memo first obtained by Jim Romenesko. The news comes as other big publishers implement online paywalls at newspapers nationwide.
McClatchy has 30 daily newspapers, including The Miami Herald, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Charlotte Observer, Kansas City Star and Sacramento Bee.
In the memo to employees, McClatchy Vice President for News Anders Gyllenhaal wrote that “after more than a year of experiments and analysis on pay models, McClatchy newspapers will begin a robust test of a pay plan that looks like the right balance for our Web sites.”
While acknowledging that online paywalls risk driving away some light users, Gyllenhaal said early experiments confirmed that many heavy users are willing to pay for access -- including multimedia subscriptions covering print, Web, smartphones and e-editions.
The New York Times Co. has introduced paywalls at its flagship newspaper as well as The Boston Globe, while Tribune Co. has introduced them at the Chicago Tribune, Baltimore Sun and Los Angeles Times.
In February, Gannett community publishing president Bob Dickey revealed plans to create online paywalls for all its community newspapers, numbering 82 in all. Nine Gannett community papers are already charging for content.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediapost.com ...
While my first job was delivering their paper (and it was a great job fir a kid!!), good luck to them. Their paper just isn’t worth payin fer. Spotty local coverage and ignoramous biased idiotorials. We won’t pay fer it. Sorry
This was tried in the early days of the Internet and it has been tried in different ways since then. It always fails since people have a million other places to find the news.
For a local newspaper I’d likely pay as long as it had local news. The problem with the local papers that are owned by the chains - which is most of them - is that most of their content is simply national feed.
Local reporting is so limited due to the tight budgets of the newspapers. Reporters at many papers are having to take furlough days. And they don’t make much to begin with.
I would be willing to pay for access (nominal charge) via the internet for a local paper if the local coverage would increase.
You'd have to be a "heavy user" to pay anything at all for that "news" fix.
If you know what I mean (and I think you do).
And to think many conservatives have been saying the left doesn't understand business or economics.
I suggest they offer a plan that allows access to obituaries only for $1 per year.
It’s the only reason to read a local paper anymore.
McClatchy was in charge of running the Pittsburgh Pirates for most of the past 20 years. ‘Nuff said.
I don't know if I can hold out another 20 years, without kneeling before my condescending MSM superiors.
(warning: addictive)
If People won’t pay for the print version then what is to say they will pay for the website version. The left doesn’t understand that people want a better product or else will go where there is a better product.
Yep, our local Gannett paper, Florida Today, went paywall. Got a few free views with a “warning” to me that my free views were about to run out. They did and that’s the last I will see of that paper. But more importantly, their advertisers’ ads. How did the WOPR put it? “interesting game you have there, the only winning move is not to play.”
When a major city newspaper like the New Orleans T-P moves to publishing three days a week, you know the end of print is closing in.
I agree. Obits are all I read in the local paper and I'm finding that more obits are published with little more than name, dob, dod, and time/place of funeral or memorial service. Seems a little cold, but then again, I'm not paying for the obit.
Isn’t McClatchy the outfit that continued to insist that Tea Party protestors hurled racial insults at a Congressman, even in the face of no evidence, and in fact in the face of counter evidence?
I will be happy to see their fortunes dwindle even further.
LOL. Ya, what can they say, if people just don’t go to their website in the first place.
I’m sure this will do our local McClatchy rag (Anchorage Daily News) a lot of good. The print edition is already almost dead because nobody wants to pay for McClatchy’s leftist California bias. What makes them think anyone will pay for the same bias online? I know I sure as hell won’t.
They're paying more attention to it's purpose - LOCAL news and native columnists...and halved the price for print edition.
Much of the local news is free with the on-line version but most of us columnists are behind the lock-box - requiring either a 99 cent one time, one article read or a yearly fee at $39. If I didn't get both free, as a writer's perk, I wouldn't be reading it.
That said, I can understand why there isn't total free access to the on-line site. Too many wouldn't bother picking up the print version. I'm just a skinflint.
The only thing that keeps the local weeklies afloat here in Louisiana is the paid legal ads that local governments publish there. The ads are mandated by state law. You should see the newspaper lobby flock to Baton Rouge whenever that issue is heard in committee.
It’s welfare for newspapers, since such stuff could be put online and be much more accessible to more people at a fraction of the cost of having it printed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.