PDA

View Full Version : Cincy.com no longer to be free



medford
02-23-2012, 12:01 PM
The enquirer's web site will be switching over to a 2 free articles a month, pay for everything else format, according to a report on WLW I heard this morning. What I find interesting, is that even if you subscribe to the paper, you still have to pay the internet feed if you want to read on line.

I guess that ends the amount of time I'll spend on that site. not surprising, but sad none the less.

dougdirt
02-23-2012, 12:07 PM
The newspaper business is full of idiots who are slow to adapt and by the time they are ready to, they do it 15 years too late. This town is going to be without a newspaper soon enough.

MikeS21
02-23-2012, 12:19 PM
Can't say I am surprised. The internet has virtually destroyed print newspapers. Advertisers have bailed out. Subscriptions have decreased. Jobs have been lost. Competition is fierce. Thing is, they could charge, but folks are just going to go elsewhere to get their local news. However, if the price is kept low, and payment options allow annual subscriptions, I might be inclined to sign up.

Which begs the question, why do web sites automatically renew subscriptions without first asking if you wish to renew? That's a pet peeve of mine. That's seriously the main obstacle why I don't sign up for Netflix or Hulu Plus.

If the Enquirer would allow me to do a one-time charge on my credit card for a year subscription, and then contact me a year from now to ask if I wanted to renew, rather than automatically billing my credit card for a renewal, they will have a much better chance of gaining me as a subscriber.

dougdirt
02-23-2012, 12:31 PM
Which begs the question, why do web sites automatically renew subscriptions without first asking if you wish to renew? That's a pet peeve of mine. That's seriously the main obstacle why I don't sign up for Netflix or Hulu Plus.
So they can get your money when you forget about it in 12 months, even if you no longer want it.

medford
02-23-2012, 12:40 PM
So they can get your money when you forget about it in 12 months, even if you no longer want it.

Plus you're more apt to say "no" if they call you up to renew, than you are to call them and cancel.

gonelong
02-23-2012, 01:01 PM
Which begs the question, why do web sites automatically renew subscriptions without first asking if you wish to renew? That's a pet peeve of mine. That's seriously the main obstacle why I don't sign up for Netflix or Hulu Plus.


Netflix is month to month, you can cancel at any time.

GL

/loves Netflix

reds1869
02-23-2012, 01:03 PM
The Enquirer will soon learn that while readers will pay for the New York Times the same is not true for their content. This will be one more nail in the coffin.

Caveat Emperor
02-23-2012, 01:33 PM
I'd pay if it was part of a rich-media, full-featured iPad app kinda like "The Daily" -- but there's no way I'm forking over for the same mostly-mediocre content I've been getting for free already. If the Enquirer wants me to pay, they need to come with better content and an incentive to subscribe.

Otherwise, honestly, WLWT.com does about the same job reporting on local stories via their website.

Roy Tucker
02-23-2012, 01:38 PM
The Enquirer will soon learn that while readers will pay for the New York Times the same is not true for their content. This will be one more nail in the coffin.

Very true.

Frankly, I don't go to their web site much because I find it poorly designed and the ad pop-ups and scroll-overs are too annoying.

I still get the newspaper, but more so that my dog can fetch it in the morning and have some purpose in life. The paper has actually gotten better in the last 6 months or so, but is still a pale copy of what it once was.

bucksfan2
02-23-2012, 01:38 PM
I still like getting my weekend paper and reading it. I hardly ever visit cincinnati.com and for some reason I don't like reading a newspaper on a computer. I still get magazines because I don't like reading them on an iPad or computer. For some reason I like the physical copy in my hands.

My wife used to work at the Enquirer and said this has been in the works for months now. They have tried many things and just haven't found the right way to charge for things. For me the main issue I have with the enquirer is the level of writing and coverage has gone straight downhill. They have been cutting cost but have cut quality and coverage at the same time.

Caveat Emperor
02-23-2012, 01:44 PM
Yeah, if they were going to charge, they should have done so straight-away and salvaged some of the content they were providing.

Now they've cut costs to nothing and done away with a lot of the coverage that would entice people to subscribe in the first place.

westofyou
02-23-2012, 01:46 PM
Why pay for such a horrible paper?

Masochist much?

dougdirt
02-23-2012, 01:48 PM
I'd pay if it was part of a rich-media, full-featured iPad app kinda like "The Daily" -- but there's no way I'm forking over for the same mostly-mediocre content I've been getting for free already. If the Enquirer wants me to pay, they need to come with better content and an incentive to subscribe.

Otherwise, honestly, WLWT.com does about the same job reporting on local stories via their website.

It is funny that you bring up the iPad app. While I don't have an iPad, I do have several Android based devices. Just last week they made a big deal about having a new app available for Cincinnati.com for the appstore and android markets. Essentially they are now likely to just kill off anyone who actually kept that piece of garbage app to begin with.

dougdirt
02-23-2012, 01:48 PM
Why pay for such a horrible paper?

Masochist much?

People won't. Soon enough Cincinnati will either not have a paper at all, or have a brand new one in place of the Enquirer.

JaxRed
02-23-2012, 01:58 PM
If the kept the price low..... I would do it. And by low I mean like $5 a year. They might even see about charging for separate areas. For example, I only care about Sports. Don't live in Cincy, never lived in Cincy, won't ever live in Cincy. Only thing I want to read about is Reds.

dougdirt
02-23-2012, 02:04 PM
Also, how would this work for twitter. Their sports guys are very active on twitter. Would they no longer tweet news, but just have headlines and links to paid articles tweeted for them?

Caveat Emperor
02-23-2012, 02:12 PM
Also, how would this work for twitter. Their sports guys are very active on twitter. Would they no longer tweet news, but just have headlines and links to paid articles tweeted for them?

I'd expect they'll stay very active. They'll be the best advertisement for the paper once the paywall goes up.

dougdirt
02-23-2012, 02:16 PM
I'd expect they'll stay very active. They'll be the best advertisement for the paper once the paywall goes up.

I would hope so, but twitter, honestly, has a terrible return rate. When I post links to articles I write, if I get even 3% of my followers to click that link, it is "a good return" compared to what I normally get.

Maybe I am just a statistical oddity in that situation.

George Anderson
02-23-2012, 04:16 PM
It's the Gannet Corp that is making this happen. They also own the Indystar which is also going to be a pay site also.

I won't pay 1 cent to read the rag so goodbye local newspaper.

AtomicDumpling
02-23-2012, 10:51 PM
The Enquirer website is literally the worst website on the Internet. There are more popups, full page ads, pop-unders, scroll-up ads and garbage on that site than anywhere else on the web.

Joseph
02-23-2012, 10:58 PM
Terrible decision by a horribly run company. The editor of that paper is just awful.

hebroncougar
02-24-2012, 11:34 AM
The Enquirer website is literally the worst website on the Internet. There are more popups, full page ads, pop-unders, scroll-up ads and garbage on that site than anywhere else on the web.

Quoted for truth. I like reading about Ky High School sports, I really miss the days of the Post.

nmculbreth
02-24-2012, 12:04 PM
Yeah, if they were going to charge, they should have done so straight-away and salvaged some of the content they were providing.

Now they've cut costs to nothing and done away with a lot of the coverage that would entice people to subscribe in the first place.

Bingo!

I'm not averse to paying for content - I've done so with the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times - but the amount and quality of the content needs to justify the expense. But after the slash and burn strategy they're left with a product that isn't worth the expense in either the digital or print format... you've got to wonder how much longer the Enquirer can remain in existence.

Reds4Life
02-24-2012, 12:30 PM
I read the site usually once a day, but I won't be paying for it. Once this happens I will just go to one of the local news channels sites.

savafan
02-24-2012, 02:20 PM
The Enquirer editor explains:

http://communitypress.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20120224/EDIT/302240070/Enquirer-editor-explains-new-subscription-model?odyssey=nav%7Chead

IslandRed
02-24-2012, 03:02 PM
Setting the economic models aside for a moment, the editorial is correct about one thing. You can find a lot of things on the Internet, but if you're looking for local news and information and you prefer getting it from someone without a dog in the fight, you're going to be looking for awhile.

I've always been a fan of newspapers. Almost made it my profession once. There's no doubt the Internet has taken its toll, but the newspaper industry hasn't helped itself by adopting the death spiral as a business plan: cuts to maintain profit margin, product gets worse as a result, sales decline, then more cuts, product gets worse, sales decline, then more cuts...

OldRightHander
02-24-2012, 03:12 PM
I have a few news apps on my ipad and I get plenty of content for nothing. I can't remember the last time I bought an Enquirer or even went to their site, so no big loss here.

reds1869
02-24-2012, 03:49 PM
Setting the economic models aside for a moment, the editorial is correct about one thing. You can find a lot of things on the Internet, but if you're looking for local news and information and you prefer getting it from someone without a dog in the fight, you're going to be looking for awhile.

And you'll keep right on looking if you go to cincinnati.com for unbiased coverage of stories in anything from politics to sports. In fairness that is true of virtually all media, though.

RBA
02-24-2012, 04:12 PM
LA times is going to free 15 stories in 30 days. Anything more and yo have to pay.

Redsfaithful
02-24-2012, 04:55 PM
I find it really funny that the editorial is split into two pages, to produce more page views.

The Enquirer really is an awful paper. The last time I looked at it, it was mostly AP articles. The Dispatch in Columbus is similar.

I can't imagine that sales of the paper were ever the primary means of funding, I have to think it was always advertising and classifieds. I'm not sure why they think now is a good time to flip that. They missed the boat. Newspapers could have easily developed Craigslist, and very late too. Just 6-7 years ago Craigslist wasn't a huge deal in Columbus.

But to compete with Craigslist they would have had to have started with free listings (CL eventually started charging for jobs and apartment listings in certain markets) and that NEVER would have happened.

There's little vision in the newspaper industry, and they've spent the last 10-15 years cutting expenses to the bone to maximize profits, and gee now they're almost dead. Who could have imagined?

I used to think we'd be much worse off without newspapers, but I really don't know anymore. The examples of investigative journalism the editor lists there are pretty weak sauce. Three have political undertones, which leads me to believe motivated political bloggers could have done similar stories. I will give them the "serious questions about how the county protects children from abusive families" story.

But if he really could go on and on, maybe he should, because I'm not convinced.

Roy Tucker
02-24-2012, 04:59 PM
I read through their online Q+A from today. I don't think it went quite the way they wanted. I can't say I saw one positive comment and the Enquirer people went on the defensive fast. One interesting thing was that there will no longer be a print-only subscription.

And the silly thing is is that they don't have their pricing model yet. So they've generated a lot of ill will and general FUD and pissed off their whole customer base for the sake of a corporate announcement.

IslandRed
02-24-2012, 06:52 PM
And you'll keep right on looking if you go to cincinnati.com for unbiased coverage of stories in anything from politics to sports. In fairness that is true of virtually all media, though.

I suppose as long as actual people are involved, complete journalistic purity will be a problem. I was thinking more of the independent angle, though. Reporters might have problems keeping their opinions out of their reporting, and a columnist's entire job is to have an opinion, but that's still better than never hearing about anything except via people who bring things to our attention because they have a stake in the outcome. And without newspapers, in many places that's all there will be.


I have a few news apps on my ipad and I get plenty of content for nothing. I can't remember the last time I bought an Enquirer or even went to their site, so no big loss here.

The danger is, most free news content exists because someone, somewhere, got paid to create it in the first place. If that whole ecosystem starts going under, we'll have a lot less available to read gratis. That's not a reason to pay for an inferior product, mind you -- just that we'll be worse off if some form of journalism can't figure out a way to remain afloat.

dougdirt
02-24-2012, 07:47 PM
The danger is, most free news content exists because someone, somewhere, got paid to create it in the first place. If that whole ecosystem starts going under, we'll have a lot less available to read gratis. That's not a reason to pay for an inferior product, mind you -- just that we'll be worse off if some form of journalism can't figure out a way to remain afloat.

Ads can make you some decent money if you have the following.