You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
How many of you (that read the telegraph) will pay the £1.99 / month to access the site?
The DT and the guardian are where I read most my online news, and having always thought I'd never pay for a news website, I will probably subscribe.
I won't. They give you 20 articles a month free, I think, so I'll use a web proxy to access any that fall beyond this.
I wish the Daily Mail would introduce a paywall. Then fewer people would be exposed to it.
Delete the Telegraph website entry in your internet cache and the count seems to reset.
Shame on all the idiots suggesting you should get around the paywall.
I'm a journalist and am based abroad and the rates we get paid are disgusting.
Front page of the Telegraph, Guardian or Times, perhaps 1000 words? That'll be about £250. Forget the fact you are risking your neck, that it'll take you a day to write the thing up and you might have done days of work towards the story...but the fact that you have to pay your driver/translator/get to the story etc. (or god forbid have something to eat or pay your electricity bill)
If you don't want every newspaper to become an version of msn news where everything is a top-10, and its all just regurgitated noise then you need to pay for things. It's not a sustainable trend to have everyone taking and nobody paying.
This country has a noble tradition of journalism and the British press is still probably the best and most respected in the world, despite all the sneering crowd who will be along in a minute to remind everyone about hacking etc.
If you think the telegraph is worth £2 a month, then pay £2 a month!
£1.99/month does seem pretty reasonable compared to The Times.
I have been tempted to pay for the FT, but it seems a bit too steep for a casual reader.
The quality to chaff ratio is pretty low these days though, even in the Telegraph. £2 a month isn't a lot but if you can get 99% of your news for free then is it worth £2 for that occasionally great piece of journalism? Not for me it isn't.
I thought only retired Brigadiers read the Telegraph? And I thought they would do so at their club over a brandy, rather than the interweb
Front page of the Telegraph, Guardian or Times, perhaps 1000 words? That'll be about £250. Forget the fact you are risking your neck, that it'll take you a day to write the thing up and you might have done days of work towards the story...but the fact that you have to pay your driver/translator/get to the story etc. (or god forbid have something to eat or pay your electricity bill)
Pretty shocking, but even with those pittance rates, the broadsheets struggle to pay their way eg The Guardian has cut back loads in the last few years and still runs at a loss, subsidised by Autotrader and other investments.
Depends if your £2 a month means that the stream of news continues, as opposed to more and more reliance on the wires.
Telegraph, Guardian and Independent here. Don't subscribe to any though. Anything beyond that I pick up via 100s of feeds on my Feedly.
Am considering the Times' £4/week offer but TBH I can't justify £200+ pa (just for some extra news) on top of all my other subs.
For those suggesting ways around the paywall for the sake of two quid for a month's worth of content, how do you think that text, images, video, design, layout, foreign reporting etc is paid for? Do you want to see more 'sponsored' content? Believe it or not, most journalists hate producing dross. But dross is cheap.
I subscribe to a number of broadsheet papers and some periodicals including the Torygraph. It makes sense fr them to do this and I can only assume that the Guardian will follow soon. It made no sense to have to subscribe to use the app (which in the DT's case is surprisingly poor) and then have all the material free via the website.
FWIW, I think papers represent incredible VFM. Half the price of a cup of coffee to access so much interesting material. But the comments on the wires are interesting. Wider access to different papers via the web shows how often wire reports are merely copied ad verbatim without any analysis or comment. Where's the "so what"?
The papers made a serious mistake when they created free to use news sites in the first place. Now punters expect news to be free, so,making them pay will be a massive struggle. Only way it could work I think is some value add content in addition to the news....like the ft does,
Its not just the free websites. The whole model of the press changed when people like Metro, etc started giving out free-sheets in the Cities. I'm sure we can argue if these are actually 'newspapers' or not, but its had a massive effect on circulation and advertising revenues of traditional papers
Joe - Member
Shame on all the idiots suggesting you should get around the paywall.I'm a journalist and am based abroad and the rates we get paid are disgusting.
Front page of the Telegraph, Guardian or Times, perhaps 1000 words? That'll be about £250. Forget the fact you are risking your neck, that it'll take you a day to write the thing up and you might have done days of work towards the story...but the fact that you have to pay your driver/translator/get to the story etc. (or god forbid have something to eat or pay your electricity bill)
If you don't want every newspaper to become an version of msn news where everything is a top-10, and its all just regurgitated noise then you need to pay for things. It's not a sustainable trend to have everyone taking and nobody paying.
This country has a noble tradition of journalism and the British press is still probably the best and most respected in the world, despite all the sneering crowd who will be along in a minute to remind everyone about hacking etc.
If you think the telegraph is worth £2 a month, then pay £2 a month!
*APPLAUDS!*
I did used to get the Guardian delivered every day, then a few years ago it stopped and it turned out my local Newsagent stopped doing deliveries due to lack of business. Then a year later he went out of business and the unit is now a take away 🙁
I think there's still a lot of people, like myself, who love sitting reading the paper. As in [i]actually[/i] printed on paper. Ideally over a pint, in my local, having just ridden home from work.
I get the Guardian every day. Mainly for the comment and editorials. I buy the Times on a 'know your enemy' basis, to fuel my northern-knee-jerk-chip-on-my-shoulder hatred for all things 'London', and the Torygraph if I've had trouble sleeping. Its like printed valium!
issue is actual news can be found on the internet for free hours before the papers get it out on their site
ad verbatim
As an educated man, I hope you don't mind me pointing out that I think this is incorrect usage. Whilst the word verbatim can be used as a noun, adverb or adjective in English. In latin my recollection is that it is only an adverb and therefore ad should not be used.