Comments on: The Myth of Paid Content http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/ An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right Wed, 15 Feb 2012 07:08:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: hankjmatt http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/comment-page-1/#comment-208713 hankjmatt Wed, 26 Aug 2009 02:49:08 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/#comment-208713 I've had these same points rolling around in my head for weeks, and wondering if it was just me. The element missing in the explanation is the void left when mass market retailers began to bow out of markets in the 90s. Those were, by and large, the dependable advertisers who kept the bills paid and the journalism affordable.<br><a href="http://www.club-penguin.org/" rel="nofollow">club penguin cheats</a> I've had these same points rolling around in my head for weeks, and wondering if it was just me. The element missing in the explanation is the void left when mass market retailers began to bow out of markets in the 90s. Those were, by and large, the dependable advertisers who kept the bills paid and the journalism affordable.
club penguin cheats

]]> By: ???? http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/comment-page-1/#comment-180292 ???? Thu, 16 Apr 2009 06:40:42 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/#comment-180292 Have to say I do agree. Things like this just are what they are. Have to say I do agree. Things like this just are what they are.

]]> By: newsbizlaw http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/comment-page-1/#comment-177760 newsbizlaw Fri, 27 Mar 2009 04:18:14 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/#comment-177760 Whew. Glad you wrote that. I've had these same points rolling around in my head for weeks, and wondering if it was just me. The element missing in the explanation is the void left when mass market retailers began to bow out of markets in the 90s. Those were, by and large, the dependable advertisers who kept the bills paid and the journalism affordable. That greased the slide into the dismal economics of newspapers today. But really, the slide began earlier--when big companies like Sears started printing their own ad inserts instead of buying ROP ads. That pulled a lot of the financial support out ot the cost of printing a page. And then along came the Postal Service in its partnering with big direct mail companies and helped escort the inserts into the direct mail stream and out of the newspaper entirely. The only reason the Internet was able to sweep away so much of the business is that by the time the retail/advertising revoluion rolled out , classified ads were the revenue stream left. So rates went up and up. Then along comes a stiff wind from cyberspace and blows the whole thing over. Whew. Glad you wrote that. I've had these same points rolling around in my head for weeks, and wondering if it was just me. The element missing in the explanation is the void left when mass market retailers began to bow out of markets in the 90s. Those were, by and large, the dependable advertisers who kept the bills paid and the journalism affordable. That greased the slide into the dismal economics of newspapers today. But really, the slide began earlier–when big companies like Sears started printing their own ad inserts instead of buying ROP ads. That pulled a lot of the financial support out ot the cost of printing a page. And then along came the Postal Service in its partnering with big direct mail companies and helped escort the inserts into the direct mail stream and out of the newspaper entirely. The only reason the Internet was able to sweep away so much of the business is that by the time the retail/advertising revoluion rolled out , classified ads were the revenue stream left. So rates went up and up. Then along comes a stiff wind from cyberspace and blows the whole thing over.

]]> By: archangel http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/comment-page-1/#comment-175755 archangel Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:02:33 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/27024/the-myth-of-paid-content/#comment-175755 even consumer reports gives away tons of info online. Subscribers get to see I think, the final best buy recommendations. But, you can also see those standing up in a barnes and noble mag rack in five seconds. <br>good article Kathy, esp pointing out that the moola doesnt come from the content; comes from investors and ads and sometimes grants, too. NYT failed utterly trying to sell content. Mainly because you could find the same content many other places, including google running the very articles in full that NYT was charging for. Unless there's only one newsgathering agency in the world left, prob cant charge for content<br><br>WSJ and Financial Times do charge, but I think again, the specialization of those is narrow. Although Rupert seems to be trying to make WSJ into a more USA Today version of WSJ what with features and all.<br><br>dr.e<br>assistant editor, columnist, The Moderate Voice even consumer reports gives away tons of info online. Subscribers get to see I think, the final best buy recommendations. But, you can also see those standing up in a barnes and noble mag rack in five seconds.
good article Kathy, esp pointing out that the moola doesnt come from the content; comes from investors and ads and sometimes grants, too. NYT failed utterly trying to sell content. Mainly because you could find the same content many other places, including google running the very articles in full that NYT was charging for. Unless there's only one newsgathering agency in the world left, prob cant charge for content

WSJ and Financial Times do charge, but I think again, the specialization of those is narrow. Although Rupert seems to be trying to make WSJ into a more USA Today version of WSJ what with features and all.

dr.e
assistant editor, columnist, The Moderate Voice

]]>