If this happens, it will be an interesting experiment. The goal is that potential online profit would make up for the continued decline of print. The biz journal has been doing this for a while now (the linked article is an example). I wonder how successful this strategy will be in a world where technology, citizen journalism, and free access to information advances every second?
QuoteJACKSONVILLE â€" The parent company of The Florida Times-Union will consider charging online readers for content and other digital services now available for free.
The move is part of Morris Publishing Group’s companywide print and digital all-access subscription strategy that will be developed this year by its newly formed internal consumer pricing task force. Morris Publishing Executive Vice President Derek May said the task force will consider multiple digital elements that will include not only an online pay wall, but also strategies for tablets, mobile devices and other digital products.
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/print-edition/2012/01/13/times-union-to-study-charging-for-its.html
It would potentially work like this:
QuoteA pay wall would include the first 15 to 20 views of certain content for free and pricing that ranges from $1 to $2.99 per month for subscribers and $3 to $6.95 per month for nonsubscribers.
The Chicago Sun-Times and its affiliates just implemented a similar system last month:
QuoteCHICAGO (AP) â€" The Chicago Sun-Times will start charging all visitors to its websites, the newspaper said Tuesday.
Starting Thursday, readers will get 20 free page views every 30 days at any site in the Sun-Times Media Group, which includes the Sun-Times and other papers in the suburbs, the newspaper said (http://bit.ly/tz6s4k). After 20 views, readers will be required to subscribe.
Print subscribers will be offered a rate of $1.99 every four weeks. Online-only subscribers will pay $6.99 every four weeks, or about $78 annually.
The Sun-Times and other print media have struggled with an economic downturn and a migration of advertisers from print to the Web. Both the Sun-Times and Chicago's other major newspaper, the Chicago Tribune, have been through bankruptcy proceedings in recent years, slashing staffs and making other cutbacks.
"We think the time is long overdue for us to begin charging for our content," said Jeremy Halbreich, the chairman of Sun-Times Media. "It is certainly award-winning content and we need to find new ways to support it."
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/print-edition/2012/01/13/times-union-to-study-charging-for-its.html
I would never pay to read the in-accurate, mispelled garbage they print.
The Tallahassee Democrat started this about a year ago.
But get this....go to a specific article, then copy that web address into Google search engine, and then go to the link and read the article for free!
For the same reason I support my local bike shop and pay a little more for stuff that I could get online for less, I won't mind paying a few bucks extra a month to support the local newspaper. I hope they find a way to survive because, like their coverage or not, they provide a valuable service to this community.
I worry that a move like this will weaken their readership numbers which may drop their advertising revenue more than they pick up from the web fees.
I beleive we all see value in paying for soemthing like the NYT or even the Chicago Sun Times as these are national papers. Why would I pay for a local online paper, when I can go to multiple other sites and see the same basic information for free? Not a good move IMHO.
I see more to it than just charging for online services. Social media in general is crippling the local papers.
Why am I going to pay for an online service when I get the info that I want (right, wrong or indifferent) for free on my facebook and twitter feed?
Journalists, the one's who actually went to school to learn a craft, are getting scooped by 'insiders' and bloggers with connections to the point that a lot of stories are being ran, before any facts can be proven, just so they aren't 3 hours late getting it out, then editing the story after publishing. Daily published papers are already 10-15 hours behind the breaking news.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on January 19, 2012, 08:25:59 AM
Journalists, the one's who actually went to school to learn a craft, are getting scooped by 'insiders' and bloggers with connections to the point that a lot of stories are being ran, before any facts can be proven, just so they aren't 3 hours late getting it out, then editing the story after publishing. Daily published papers are already 10-15 hours behind the breaking news.
This is the troubling part to me. I believe there will always be a place for good, accurate journalism in the world and I hope the professionals don't sell themselves out just to keep up the race to be first.
Perhaps media sources like the Florida Times-Union should give up on being the first to present a story and focus more on providing editorial, commentary and in-depth analysis of local issues.
As an example, I enjoy reading the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal. I don't care enough about the business world and national politics to read about it every day. But I do like to keep up with the general topics in the headlines and gain a better understanding of the overall issues - once a week. I don't always agree with the political slant, however, the journalism is good and enjoyable to read.
It's really hard to convince people to pay for something that they're grown accustomed to getting for free. That said, the T-U -- warts and all -- is a valuable resource to the Jacksonville community, and the website is actually much better than the newspaper itself. I'd probably be willing to pay $3 a month to access the site. As mentioned above though, I wonder if the dramatic decrease in page views (and subsequent decrease in ad revenue) that would come from a move to a pay model would offset any additional funds brought in by subscribers. I do think it's patently absurd though to offer tiered pricing as described in the article based on whether or not you are a print subscriber.
QuoteThe biz journal has been doing this for a while now (the linked article is an example).
The difference in that is that you also get the Book of Lists and all kinds of special publications throughout the year with the Biz Journal subscription... and a weekly paper as well.
QuotePerhaps media sources like the Florida Times-Union should give up on being the first to present a story and focus more on providing editorial, commentary and in-depth analysis of local issues.
Bingo. If there was a product worth paying for, I would. Currently they don't offer me anything I can't find out on my own just eating breakfast at the Fox.
Quote from: dougskiles on January 19, 2012, 08:37:52 AM
This is the troubling part to me. I believe there will always be a place for good, accurate journalism in the world and I hope the professionals don't sell themselves out just to keep up the race to be first.
When there's a big story, everyone wants to be the one to break it. Why? Hell, I don't know, I'm not a reporter. I'd rather be the one that was right, personally, but it doesn't necessarily pay to be right, just first:
Earlier in the week a sports blogger 'confirmed with inside sources' that Jim Caldwell was keeping his job. The beat reporter from the local Indy paper called him to verify, and ran the story tuesday afternoon that Caldwell was safe. The beat writer for the Colts, Kravitz, was getting ripped for not getting the story first, after all, he covers the team from the inside. Via twitter, via bulletin boards, via facebook - the 'FACT' that Caldwell was staying and Kravitz was an ass was all over the place, it was ugly, but he stood his ground. As the guy covering the team, couldn't come up with one verifiable source about the coach keeping his job.
Later in the day, Irsay fires the coach, Kravitz gets it right for waiting, but the tsunami had already hit, and this is the part that is most disturbing for me and I would assume for news outlets in general: The traffic that was generated when the first, incorrect, story came out was tremendous. There was a period of about 2 hours that they were peaking on webhits, user comments and other page views on several different websites, when the truth came out in the late afternoon, it was like another Tuesday night. That's a problem.
This is probably overly cynical, but if the TU is even considering this, they should just get it over with and close up shop now. "We don't have enough money so let's charge more for the same stuff" is a signal of a failing company, end of discussion. Not to mention that they would have a huge tradeoff between the subscription charge and anything they bring in from advertising - it would pretty much obliterate their page views.
Print media is dead, and they're just trying to figure out how to apply the same model to the internet.
QuoteThis is probably overly cynical, but if the TU is even considering this, they should just get it over with and close up shop now
The TU actually is a profit center for Morris. It's the parent company that is bleeding money at the moment and they are trying to squeeze every nickel out of the pennies they have left.
I don't have a problem with an online subscription-based service and don't have a problem with the TU trying to find relevancy in the digital age(I pay for Wall Street Journal on view it online without hesitation, and pay for the Jax Biz Journal.. and even subscribe to the Atlantic, Fast Company and Inc even though I can also view their websites for free). But there has to be a relevant reason to pay for it. Right now, they've gotten rid of a lot of their editorial staff and don't offer much investigative insight. I genuinely like a few people over at the TU. But, Melissa Ross' show (for free), MetroJacksonville.com (for free) and morning breakfast at the Fox offers better local editorial content than the TU does.
Quote from: fieldafm on January 19, 2012, 09:42:22 AM
QuoteThis is probably overly cynical, but if the TU is even considering this, they should just get it over with and close up shop now
The TU actually is a profit center for Morris. It's the parent company that is bleeding money at the moment and they are trying to squeeze every nickel out of the pennies they have left.
That is my understanding, too. FWIW, the huge cuts demanded by the company are why the FTU can't offer the editorial and investigative content they used to. There are just too few people working after the layoffs that came despite the fact that it would be a profitable paper on its own.
I'm all for the TU doing whatever it takes to keep solvent. I don't know if this will do that or not, but they are a critically valuable asset to this community. Something's got to give; no real paper has figured out how to really make money online.
Why is this so hard.
Excuse: I don't buy the paper because I can get it online for free. Solution: Offer free online access with paid daily subscription. An additional nominal monthly charge would be added for those who already get Weekend and Sunday if they want the online access. The rest of us.... We can suck it. Let us see the current front page with no additional access, teach the writers to creatively use the jump queue and let the market do what it does.
If we really want it, we'll pay for a subscription.
Quote from: Clem1029 on January 19, 2012, 09:18:28 AM
This is probably overly cynical, but if the TU is even considering this, they should just get it over with and close up shop now. "We don't have enough money so let's charge more for the same stuff" is a signal of a failing company, end of discussion. Not to mention that they would have a huge tradeoff between the subscription charge and anything they bring in from advertising - it would pretty much obliterate their page views.
Print media is dead, and they're just trying to figure out how to apply the same model to the internet.
After nearly 150 years serving the community, I'm not ready to write the Times-Union off yet. I genuinely hope they can bounce back. I definitely don't think that charging a fee for the content we already get for free is the solution, but a premium subscription service - if well executed - could be a real savior for the Times-Union. A few features that I would gladly pay a monthly fee for:
- First look news. Depending on the timeliness of the story, articles could be posted between an hour and a day early for premium subscribers. The article would still be posted for free on the regular site, but subscribers would have first access.
- Complete WELL CURATED online archives of the Times-Union, with major stories easily accessible. I would love to see former TU publications, such as the Jacksonville Journal and the Star Edition (black edition) of the FTU archived as well. It's shockingly hard to find certain information about the city's history, and this could be an incredible resource.
- It would be equally fantastic to partner with a local news station and offer historic local broadcast footage as well. I know news stations were in the habit of recording over a lot of their masters in the 60s and 70s, but surely a lot of footage must still exist. Would be really cool (read: premium) to relive coverage of events like Irsay landing a helicopter in the Gator Bowl in 79, Jacksonville winning an expansion NFL franchise, the USFL, the 295 Sniper, the Landing opening, past New Year's/Tree Lightings/Boat Parades, Presidential visits, big events/concerts, etc.
- Expanded restaurant and show reviews.
- A well moderated discussion forum where subscribers could interact in an intelligent fashion with TU staff and other subscribers.
- A network of user blogs, with the best entries being featured on the site, maybe even for a nominal reward (free month added to your subscription, show tickets, free meals from sponsors, etc.) to encourage quality.
- In depth, feature stories not available on the free site.
- An assortment of weekly podcasts from the staff (eg. Gene and Tania doing a Jags podcast, Sorgel doing a movie podcast, a dining podcast, a podcast dealing with local issues of the week, etc.)
- Great tablet and smart phone apps to manage all of this information on the go.
If well implemented, I'd happily pay up to $10 a month or so.
A ton of websites have managed to very successfully add a premium membership option on top of their free site. I personally subscribe monthly to a good half dozen websites. The key seems to be making the premium features active, rather than passive - building a community inside of this walled garden. Definitely think there is a way to maximize ad views from the readers who will never pay a cent while still superserving a smaller group of active paying enthusiasts.
IF IMPLEMENTED WELL, and presented as a value-added supplement for subscribers rather than a punitive measure against free loaders, it could be an awesome thing.
QuoteIf we really want it, we'll pay for a subscription.
The problem with that though is if they drastically reduce the people who view their webpage... they then drastically reduce their ad revenue, which is much greater than any money they'll collect from subscription fees.
I like these ideas:
QuoteComplete WELL CURATED online archives of the Times-Union
In depth, feature stories not available on the free site.
I think the Biz Journal does it pretty well in regards to the mix b/w paid subscribers and short tidbits available online for free. I just wish they had a better mobile app.
Quote from: fieldafm on January 19, 2012, 10:47:26 AM
The problem with that though is if they drastically reduce the people who view their webpage... they then drastically reduce their ad revenue, which is much greater than any money they'll collect from subscription fees.
The other problem is for those making the news. If you are the Jaguars, Mayor, Council members, citizen/advocate, local business - and you have a story that is in the news - you want it to reach as many people as possible (well - OK - most of the time you do). By limiting the audience, the ability to spread your message is diminished.
It is important for our community that we have a strong, reliable media outlet that is readily available to everyone.
The TV channels don't provide this service. If I have an issue I want to bring to the community's attention, I can't walk down to Channel 4 and ask them to do an editorial piece. But I can write a letter to the editor and if my content is good, I have a pretty good chance of getting it published in the Florida Times Union.
Basically what Ken said. If they want to suddenly monetize the site, they're going to have to ADD value, not take away value that used to be free. The days of websites all charging for content and still being successful are over, in my opinion.
Also what Doug said. A lot of us use aggregates like Google News to get news from all over the world. Let me tell you, if the ONLY news links from Jacksonville goes to a walled garden that says "You must pay up to read this", that's what the internet calls a "fail".
Hmm...I look forward to their experiment. It only gives sites like metro Jacksonville an increased opportunity to be seen and heard.
Anyone else think the Times-Union is out of its mind with the way that they are handing this new move into the paid digital space?
Asking web site readers to pay a monthly fee, without even laying out exactly what they are paying for or what specific premium content they will be recieving aside from a snazzier layout, is insane. The $11.50 monthly rate for non-print subscribers is equally irrational. That's more than the Economist, way more than the Daily (which is $39 a year), and comparable to the Wall Street Journal. In a world where online news is predominantly free/ad-supported, you had better provide the highest quality in the country to even think about charging that much per month. I definitely think they can succeed with a premium website, but the entire way they have gone about it thus far -- from the self-congratulatory editorial about the high quality of their journalism (based on a sample of two local interest stories), to the bizarre vaguery of what specifics the premium site contains -- just seems all wrong.
Instead of the pandering, "you're not a reader, you're a member!" rhetoric, it would have been nice to provide a detailed breakdown of either a) what specific additional features you will recieve for your monthly feee, or b) what existing features will be moving behind a pay wall.
I wish them the best, but I seriously can't imagine who would sign up for this as it has currently been presented.
I have my doubts that this will work long term but I'm taking a wait and see approach. Me? With free access to many resources, I can't justify the expense. I rather spend the $11.50 at a food truck.
If you're going to charge people $11.50 for content, you can't be making basic mistakes like this.
From their current main story (see bold).
QuoteYMCA announces $21 million Riverside Y to replace current building
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-10-19/story/ymca-announces-21-million-riverside-y-replace-current-building#ixzz29m8gq1z0
After years of planning, the YMCA of Florida’s First Coast has kicked off an aggressive plan to fund a $21 million three-story showplace to replace the aging Riverside branch, expand services throughout neighboring areas and help rejuvenate downtown.
The 80,000-square-foot, glass-fronted complex will be built on vacant riverfront property behind the current branch, which is on Riverside Drive near the Acosta Bridge. When construction is complete, the old building will be torn down and replaced with surface parking.
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-10-19/story/ymca-announces-21-million-riverside-y-replace-current-building#ixzz29m8aYuyJ
Come on T-U.
That's where your own building is.
It's Riverside Avenue TU. It looks like a large parking lot fronting Riverside Ave.
Hey TU, the original corporation that makes up today's Norfolk Southern had a similar idea back in the mid-1960's. They were losing their (nether regions) on the remaining passenger trains between Cincinnati and Jacksonville... What to do? Let's eliminate one train outright, cut off the dining cars, drop the sleepers, make the surviving train coach-only, then truncate the route in St George, Georgia, in the Okefenokee Swamp, 31 miles from Jacksonville Terminal. It was the old, 'if you think we've lost money before - wait until you see this,' routine. A streamlined passenger train from Cincinnati to St. George quickly fell apart. Funny if it weren't so sad and true.
Now the newspaper is going to commit the same error and lose massive amounts of their daily readership. How? Print readers are using newsprint in increasing numbers for door stops and fly swatters. New readers are using the web or in some cases slick specialty magazines most of which come with specialty web-content. You'll be offering the same old newspaper on a computer screen for the same old premium, only now I won't have anything tangible at all to show for it. So your not going to grab much market share, and as everyone has pointed out the risk of loss of more readership will tilt the advertising revenue in a downward spiral.
Why not try something original, like REALLY nice in depth reporting, pro and con articles, investigative as well as great archival material and photos for FREE? Want a photo? You pay for that. Want reprints? You pay for that too.
Grow the readership to the point where your ad revenue exceeds your previous ad and subscription revenue combined, but do it with quality rather then nickel and dime fees. Of course you could just move the entire operation to St. George, Georgia, I understand they still have great BBQ but their lacking a newspaper.
I don't understand the pricing. I can subscribe to Sunday Only delivery for $95 a year + tax, which I believe includes full access to the members site...obviously that comes out to less than $11.50 per month plus I'd get all of the coupons every Sunday! Am I missing something?
I was at the Arts Market today when I came across a guy from the TU giving out free papers and talking up subscriptions. I told him I'd think it over and went to find my wife, to blow money on delicious food items. Later, as we looked at the paper, we noticed it was LAST week's Sunday edition. We laughed and took it home to use as firestarter for the grill.
I mean, I know it's a free paper, but handing out week old newspapers is just a strange way to try to drum up business.
Quote from: KenFSU on October 19, 2012, 01:44:33 PM
Anyone else think the Times-Union is out of its mind with the way that they are handing this new move into the paid digital space?
Asking web site readers to pay a monthly fee, without even laying out exactly what they are paying for or what specific premium content they will be recieving aside from a snazzier layout, is insane. The $11.50 monthly rate for non-print subscribers is equally irrational.
For comparison's sake, the Orlando Sentinel also charges for online content. However, its significantly cheaper:
QuoteJoin Now
Thank you for frequently visiting OrlandoSentinel.com. You have reached your allowance of free articles. To read more, we invite you to become an exclusive member, giving you unlimited access to our website and content:
Try a digital membership today for just 59¢ for the first five weeks.*
After five weeks, you'll pay just $4.99 every five weeks, or just $2.99 every five weeks if you get the Orlando Sentinel newspaper less than seven days a week or you subscribe to the eEdition.*
Current 7-day Orlando Sentinel newspaper subscribers will receive a free membership to the website (just activate your free membership by clicking 'Next' below).
*Your continuous membership automatically renews every 5 weeks. You may cancel at any time by contacting Press+ before the expiration of the billing cycle to avoid automatic charges to your credit card for the next billing cycle. You will be notified in advance of any price changes. Sales tax may apply.
Quote from: dougskiles on January 19, 2012, 12:53:38 PM
Quote from: fieldafm on January 19, 2012, 10:47:26 AM
The problem with that though is if they drastically reduce the people who view their webpage... they then drastically reduce their ad revenue, which is much greater than any money they'll collect from subscription fees.
The other problem is for those making the news. If you are the Jaguars, Mayor, Council members, citizen/advocate, local business - and you have a story that is in the news - you want it to reach as many people as possible (well - OK - most of the time you do). By limiting the audience, the ability to spread your message is diminished.
Information and the access to it is power.
It is important for our community that we have a strong, reliable media outlet that is readily available to everyone.
The TV channels don't provide this service. If I have an issue I want to bring to the community's attention, I can't walk down to Channel 4 and ask them to do an editorial piece. But I can write a letter to the editor and if my content is good, I have a pretty good chance of getting it published in the Florida Times Union.
Breaking Times-Union news:
"The velvet rope is up" on the members section.
"Times-Union Media’s All-Access plan launches Thursday to bring more exclusive content and a better user experience to members."
Kind of implies a poor user experience for non-paid members.
I could justify the $1 a week impulse buy price that Ennis noted above with the Orlando Sentinel, but again, $11.50 a month is insane compared to where the current comparable market value is for content like this.
Can't make this stuff up.
From the comments section of the below article, a Times-Union editor defending the quality of journalism in the TU while simulataneously butchering the English language.
Quote"I'm an editor at Jacksonville.com/The Times-Union.
There will still be a lot of things for free on Jacksonville.com -- breaking news, daily stories, photo galleries, etc. The $11.50 charge is includes content on members.jacksonville.com, iPad app, and mobile apps."
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-11-01/story/welcome-all-access-jacksonvillecom?cid=hp-mostcommented#ixzz2B51RT4Ln
when you click on a member only article, just hit stop on your browser before that popup appears.
Quote from: fsquid on November 02, 2012, 12:39:04 PM
when you click on a member only article, just hit stop on your browser before that popup appears.
Once I close the popup, it lets me read the article anyway. Is there more members-only content that I'm not seeing? Should I be wearing my dad's old Members Only jacket to take full advantage?
Quote from: Bativac on November 02, 2012, 02:38:48 PM
Quote from: fsquid on November 02, 2012, 12:39:04 PM
when you click on a member only article, just hit stop on your browser before that popup appears.
Once I close the popup, it lets me read the article anyway. Is there more members-only content that I'm not seeing?
Beefcake photos of Matt Soergel and Gary Mills.
Quote from: Bativac on November 02, 2012, 02:38:48 PM
Should I be wearing my dad's old Members Only jacket to take full advantage?
YES.A heightened standard of conduct and attire is required when one steps
beyond the velvet rope.I imagine the Member's Only section as a darkened lounge where a few dozen of the city's elite, pipes in mouth and draped in only smoking robes, share a private snicker at the lowly non-members with Ron Littlepage and Gene Frenette.
"These leechers plead and beg, 'Matt, what did
really think of teen musical comedy
Pitch Perfect?'" Soergel asks, topping off a member's tumbler of scotch.
"Stop depending on government handouts to raise your kids, open your wallet, and perhaps one day you too will be able to join us in here and find out," he adds dismissively.
Looks like the Times-Union has put their digital paywall back up.
Quote from: KenFSU on May 23, 2018, 04:51:11 PM
Looks like the Times-Union has put their digital paywall back up.
Does this mean they will stop flooding my Facebook feed with stories about how bad Trump is?
I took a hiatus from FB, and it feel so good. The Jaguar FB groups is the only reason why I have a FB page. It's way too much leftist propaganda on FB; I'm sure that Zuck loves it that way.