Why are online newspapers so freaking expensive?

[Nords]

I like reading the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. I would gladly purchase a subscription to both. But the NYT digital-only costs $195/year ($250/year if you want to read the same content on your ipad too!) and the WSJ digital-only costs $260/year. That seems way too high to me!

Soup, I bet you could reproduce the content that you enjoy reading in those papers just by going to the business sections of Reuters, AP, Business Week, and your local "Business News" franchise. If you like a particular writer then they probably have a blog that covers much of the same subject.

My local lousy newspaper wants $15/month and I just laugh.

Star-Advertiser lost me for life with their paywall. It forced me to discover "alternative" news sources like Pacific Business News, Civil Beat, and Ian Lind's blog. I still go to the S-A's front page to read the breaking news, but after that I can find whatever I want at their AP links and their Hawaii News Now links.

I thought I'd miss some local writers like Susan Scott and "Kokua Line". The answer turns out to be "not enough to pay to read them".

 

[mickeyd]

I don't think that I would ever pay for online news because online mews has always been free as far as I am concerned. If I want to hold the paper in my hand, I can always stroll down to the public library and read away.

OTOH, I don't seem to mind spending over $20/month to read to subscribe to the local rag.

We people are funny folks.

 

[MBAustin]

Interesting how this discussion ties in neatly with the podcast in this thread:

www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/the-cost-value-of-free-62172.html

The Planet Money team talks about different kinds of free goods/services and how people view them differently. Quite interesting.

Edit: Oops, I clearly don't know how to properly reference one thread from another. But the link should work OK.

 

[Buckeye]

I was making do on the NYT's free 20 articles a month but they dropped it to 10. About the time they did that (May?), I became a college student again. The student rate is $7.50 per month after the first month for 99 cents. I consider $7.50 to be a fair price so I signed up. I think the regular subscription price is double the student price and I don't see myself paying that.

Amazon convinced me to sign up for Amazon Prime because students get 6 months free and then a reduced rate. Seems like it's to get addicted to Amazon Prime.

 

[samclem]

Given what I perceive as the death of independent investigative journalism during our lifetimes, newspapers are not worth those prices to me.

That's why I buy our local paper (the Dayton Daily News). I want a bunch of busybodies investigating corruption in city hall, letting me know about big interests buying zoning changes, the new red light cameras and the controversies surrounding them, etc. It's well worth it to me to buy the paper just to support this staff of reporters. And they seem to be doing an okay job of ferreting this stuff out in this paper, and are marketing their successes. The local coupons and the free/low cost events I learn about through reading the paper pay for the subscription. I think we'd be worse off as a town if our newspaper stopped publishing a daily edition, so I subscribe. To me, it's like supporting NPR: I don't agree with them editorially, but I want them around and there's no one else covering things the way they do.

For national news: WSJ delivered every day to my door for $99/year. It's a promotional rate, but I re-up every year. And I like the idea that I'm surporting their reporting staff, too.

"Pulling" news from blogs, etc is okay, but a "push" system assures you receive things you wouldn't otherwise think to retrieve.

 

[ShortInSeattle]

I hate hard copy newspapers because the are huge and unwieldy. I'm considering a digital WSJ subscription, but it's a bit too pricey for my taste. Also, they won't let you buy single edition digital, it's either the full subscription or nothing. Boo.

Perhaps we should suck it up and spend the money. If we don't support the journalists we have left we'll be stuck as gossip masquerading as news.

SIS

 

[Htown Harry]

A year of WSJ home delivery is available to new subscribers for about 3200 airline miles.

 

[powerplay]

My aunt subscribes to the local newspaper which now charges $26/month for seven days a week delivery. That isn't the only cost though since about a year and a half ago they stopped the weekly TV insert on Sunday. She now has to subscribe to that separately at the 'special' rate of $69 or so a year.

I read the daily newspaper in the morning at the community center after I exercise. It's one of my luxuries since I've retired and don't have to hurry off to a job. I also purchase the Sunday paper ($2) on Saturday mainly for the coupon inserts. Delivery of the Sun. paper costs more than the newstand price and they don't deliver till about 8am on Sunday so that doesn't work for me. When they have subscription drives and I tell them why I won't they never have any answers. I think they are choosing to go extinct.

 

[RockyMtn]

Folks...having been in the media business for 30 years I can tell you that the creation of content is not cheap whether it be televsion, newspapers, etc. "Free" seldom creates a very sustainable business proposition. As more readers move to the internet as opposed to buying the actual paper revenues drop not only in terms of subscriptions but also advertising....hence the charge for online access.

That being said if you can get by with the limited viewing offered by papers such as the NY Times, WSJ, FT, LA Times etc....more power to you.

Buy a Sunday only subscription, use it for kitty litter and read unlimited on line articles!

 

[Lsbcal]

Forgot to mention that we do subscribe to the local paper. Need to know about the stranger side of our city.

Also what would I do when I need the paper to catch my beard shaving's every morning?

Plus if you put the newpaper under your garbage bag it soaks up the excess so the garbage bag doesn't disintegrate on the bottom.

 

[Dawg52]

I get all the news, sports, travel and financial news I want free from various sources online. Well not totally free as I pay for the internet service, but you get my drift. My mom subscribes to the local paper and it takes me less than 5 minutes to thumb through it. And 75% of that time is spent reading the funnies.

 

[Mulligan]

That's why I buy our local paper (the Dayton Daily News). I want a bunch of busybodies investigating corruption in city hall, letting me know about big interests buying zoning changes, the new red light cameras and the controversies surrounding them, etc. It's well worth it to me to buy the paper just to support this staff of reporters. And they seem to be doing an okay job of ferreting this stuff out in this paper, and are marketing their successes. The local coupons and the free/low cost events I learn about through reading the paper pay for the subscription. I think we'd be worse off as a town if our newspaper stopped publishing a daily edition, so I subscribe. To me, it's like supporting NPR: I don't agree with them editorially, but I want them around and there's no one else covering things the way they do.

For national news: WSJ delivered every day to my door for $99/year. It's a promotional rate, but I re-up every year. And I like the idea that I'm surporting their reporting staff, too.

"Pulling" news from blogs, etc is okay, but a "push" system assures you receive things you wouldn't otherwise think to retrieve.

That is a very good point. If the journalism side dies off from lack of money, that only leaves the tv reporters as the community watchdogs.

 

[Idnar7]

Our local paper offers 20 free online articles per month. When you get down to 5 left, they try to get you to subscribe. I soon figured out that their counter was held in their cookie. Delete the cookie and the counter resets to zero.

Cable TV - maybe my memory is failing me again, but wasn't one of selling points of cable TV was that their programming was going to be commercial-free? If so, how did that work out for ya? I understand the networks having commercials, but pay channels? I am paying for the right to watch commercial interruptions on cable?

 

[glippy]

Now, how to get local tv news to suffer the same fate... I'm so sick of their sensationalist garbage.

"Who's stealing your children? Tune in, at 11!"

 

[audreyh1]

We dropped our newspaper delivery & subscription in 2000 soon after we retired:

1. The paper was lousy about stopping delivery when we traveled and we quickly got fed up. That's what made us stop.
2. My husband discovered how much free time he had in the morning if he didn't have a paper to read. I would usually only read the weekend editions.
3. The local paper had an free online version by then and it was pretty complete.

We never looked back. What a relief not to have a local paper.

Our neighbors get us to collect their papers when they travel for short periods, and they are always amazed when we return them unread. For them, that does not compute. They couldn't believe we weren't getting the local paper either.

We get all our news online now. Can't stand TV news either. Occasionally go to major news sources if there is something of interest, but otherwise ignore it. Yay!

 

[Hamlet]

I've been wondering how many other people realize that you can reset this counter on your internet browser by deleting the cookies.

You can get all the NYT articles you want for free, because when you hit the 10/month limit you can just delete your cookies (or open a different browser app) and start over.

I was making do on the NYT's free 20 articles a month but they dropped it to 10. About the time they did that (May?), I became a college student again. The student rate is $7.50 per month after the first month for 99 cents. I consider $7.50 to be a fair price so I signed up. I think the regular subscription price is double the student price and I don't see myself paying that.

Amazon convinced me to sign up for Amazon Prime because students get 6 months free and then a reduced rate. Seems like it's to get addicted to Amazon Prime.

 

[Walt34]

That's why I buy our local paper (the Dayton Daily News). I want a bunch of busybodies investigating corruption in city hall, letting me know about big interests buying zoning changes, the new red light cameras and the controversies surrounding them, etc. It's well worth it to me to buy the paper just to support this staff of reporters.

Same here, and that's also partly why I subscribe to the local paper. They also do a good job of reporting the "good news" of local goings-on, such as the "Weekender" section detailing local stuff to do that is either free or low cost within about a 50-mile radius.

 

[ls99]

Once or twice a week I buy the Pittsburgh paper, to read recent history.

If I want news, just scan a few websites online.

 

[MichaelB]

+1 @ samclem

We subscribe and pay for a number of newspapers and magazines. Online papers are better for us, physical delivery is problematic because of frequent absences when we are on the road. We choose those sources that get the bulk of their revenue from the subscription price and not advertising.

In the past we lived in a country where the press is not free (and I'm not talking about money). People underestimate the benefits of an effective press. It is well worth paying for, and it is also indispensable to our way of life.

 

[soupcxan]

I am not trying to get something for nothing. Quality reporting takes time and money, but it is being pushed out of the market by the blogosphere and "reporting" that seems more interested in Tom Cruise's divorce than anything substantive. I find TV news, both local and cable, to be of generally low quality. I can read CNN and USAToday for free online but I don't find either of them particularly thought-provoking. CNN is relying more on video clips (which I hate) and self-reported stories (which are worthless). USAToday is blandly written; it is like sliced white bread in a world of handmade wheat rolls. I fear that the death of local newspapers' investigative reporting will remove one of the few remaining checks and balances on local government.

I listen to NPR a lot and despite their bias I find them to be very informative. Even though they are "free" I contribute to them voluntairly because they provide a useful service at a fair price. I would like to support the NYT and WSJ as well because they are the best of a dying breed. But why, why do they think it makes sense to the customer to charge LESS for a daily delivered dead-tree edition plus online content, versus just selling me the online content? Deleting the NYT cookie every 10 articles is a pain, and not even an option for the WSJ.

Ethical question: is it more wrong to (a) sign up using a student discount and give the papers ~50% of the $$$ they're asking for, or (b) to do nothing, continue using their websites for the free articles, and give them no $$$ at all.

 

[MooreBonds]

But why, why do they think it makes sense to the customer to charge LESS for a daily delivered dead-tree edition plus online content, versus just selling me the online content?

Because - they charge all advertisers $.x per circulated copy of dead-tree edition. The amount they charge advertisers for on-line page views is MUCH lower, and the number of page views their typical on-line viewer views is typically MUCH lower, resulting in less advertising revenue per on-line subscriber compared to the dead-tree recipient.

If each on-line subscriber, on average, viewed enough page hits to bring in more revenue per subscriber compared to the dead-tree version, then they would have a definite economic incentive to have a lower subscription price compared to the dead-tree edition.

 

[Lsbcal]

...(snip)... Deleting the NYT cookie every 10 articles is a pain, and not even an option for the WSJ.

Ethical question: is it more wrong to (a) sign up using a student discount and give the papers ~50% of the $$$ they're asking for, or (b) to do nothing, continue using their websites for the free articles, and give them no $$$ at all.

I'd vote for (a) because if you asked their management they have to be stupid to choose (b).

I actually sent the NYT email a long time ago requesting some alternative. But they didn't listen to me . So now I feel free to exploit them . Just kidding.

 

[MichaelB]

Here is one explanation for bland newspaper articles New reporter? Call him Al, for algorithm - Yahoo! News Canada

The new reporter on the US media scene takes no coffee breaks, churns out articles at lightning speed, and has no pension plan.
That's because the reporter is not a person, but a computer algorithm, honed to translate raw data such as corporate earnings reports and previews or sports statistics into readable prose.

Algorithms are producing a growing number of articles for newspapers and websites, such as this one produced by Narrative Science:
"Wall Street is high on Wells Fargo, expecting it to report earnings that are up 15.7 percent from a year ago when it reports its second quarter earnings on Friday, July 13, 2012," said the article on Forbes.com.

While computers cannot parse the subtleties of each story, they can take vast amounts of raw data and turn it into what passes for news, analysts say.

"This can work for anything that is basic and formulaic," says Ken Doctor, an analyst with the media research firm Outsell.

Ethical question: is it more wrong to (a) sign up using a student discount and give the papers ~50% of the $$$ they're asking for, or (b) to do nothing, continue using their websites for the free articles, and give them no $$$ at all.

Option "B" seems to comply with the rules and does not appear unethical.

 

[Buckeye]

Ethical question: is it more wrong to (a) sign up using a student discount and give the papers ~50% of the $$$ they're asking for, or (b) to do nothing, continue using their websites for the free articles, and give them no $$$ at all.

Why would there be any ethical question about taking a student discount when you are a student and the paper offers a student discount? They control it by requiring an active school email address.

 

[soupcxan]

I have not been a student for several years but I still have a valid .edu address. Hence the moral question about using the student discount.

I understand why newspapers think they should charge less for printed+online than just online due to ad rates. But from the consumers' point of view it is asinine. I am getting a discount for the hassle of taking an unread newspaper off my lawn and dropping it, unread, in the recycle bin everyday That must be great for the environment.