Sun Insider: Web Paywall "Suicide" - 9/27 - Updated. DCRTV hears from an inside source that morale at the Baltimore Sun is slumping after news, which DCRTV broke first last week, that the Tribune-owned newspaper will be erecting a paywall around its baltimoresun.com website. "Morale in the newsroom is at a low point. No one can understand why we'd make print subscribers pay for the online stuff. It's just suicide, an experiment being carried out by the Tribune on just one of its properties." The website access plan, which takes effect October 10, will cost $2.49 a week or $49.99 for 26 weeks, after an introductory discount. Print subscribers will receive a reduced rate of 75 cents a week or $29.99 a year. While Sun has since run several articles about the paywall plan, "On Monday, management shut down the comments section on the Sun paywall story. They are insisting we call it a 'digital subscription.' And any comments by staff bloggers and Tweeters must be cleared by Editor Trif Alatzas," says the source. "Freedom of speech for Sun readers and writers? Not so fast." More: We hear from another source at the paper who says that there's been "no directive about Tweeting or blogging, though certainly if someone Tweets something stupid or blogs erroneously... then they're going to get corrected." Also, the Sun is not the only Tribune paper erecting a paywall - the Allentown Morning Call is doing it, too, we're told. "I think most of us actually are nervously hopeful that this will work out. We've cut a ton of people and content in recent years through buyouts and layoffs and we want to see that stop".....Would u pay $129.48 a year for the Sun? (I pay more than that for the NYTimes.. but it's the NYTimes...!) ... wonder why Trib co. picked the Sun and the Allentown paper, and not, say, the Hampton Roads Daily Press?
In other news of broke-azz sources, the company that owns the Jewish Times and Style magazine is in the midst of an acrimonious bankruptcy proceeding. The JT's printer claims Alter Communications owes them $1.77 million(!)
11 comments:
wow.... that dcrtv.com website looks straight out of 1995!! WTH? Is that "the future" of newspapers online?
I think it is Great. Only a few will pay for it. Less propoganda will be spread. RIP Baltimore Sun
Change at the Sun can be a good thing, at least for the blogging community. If the teeming masses can't get to their news through regular sources, I suppose they will get creative and find another way to access what they need to know. Now who has a news blog????
I saw PH on Sunday, he didn't look happy. The writers thrive on popularity. If one has 4.8 million people reading their stuff that makes reporters happy. If they have 3 people reading their stuff that would probably make them less happy. But if the Baltimore Sun wants people to give them money and jump through hoops to read the very limited amount of information that is worth reading in their paper then that is their right. The Baltimore Sun is NOT the New York Times. The NYTs lives in 2011 and that paper reflects this new age, the Baltimore Sun still thinks it is 1975, that people want to be married, escape the suburbs and obsess about sports teams. It's a dead zone.
Dear Cham,
For someone who seems to live and die on chastising the Sun for lack of reporting/factfinding/factchecking/whatever, I would pose the question: if you were running the Sun, what would YOU do?
Most of the news which bloggers get comes from reporting at the Sun, Baltimore Brew excepted. Most news blogs aren't worth very much--and most don't make any money. If ya want to find out about crime and political news, you have to have reporters with the time and skill to sort thru stuff to get us the news--and pay them.
Buz wonders if the Cham which comments here is the same person as Cham101 which comments in the Sun, and shows promise as a crack CompStat anaylyst for crime.
... my worry is not how will we find out about a missing kid or a murder, but who will hold people in power accountable for misguided polices, corruption, waste, etc?
... speaking of, did anybody see the Sun magazine, new this week? How could anyone interview Cordish and not ask a single question about swapping green cards for casino investments? And a puff piece on the nice new decor in local labor & delivery wards... as if it's foregone conclusion that what matters when you're trying to decide where to have a baby is what the floors look like. It was so fluffy about tough subjects it was almost subversive.
The pay wall isn't the noose for the Sun.. at least it'll get some revenue coming in that wasn't there before, and people who will pay to read the news are surely a more desirable demographic for advertisers than a bunch of random Googling freeloaders. But the paper's ability to shame dirty developers and future potential Holtons and Curries into caring that it looks like they're acting right is drawing to a close ... no more "light for all."
All of us who are regular readers over the years can probably remember investigations that have been started or policies which have been changed because of the reporting of the reporters at the Sun.
If the Sun goes under or dramatically cut back that coverage, you're right, mj, the check on public official officiousness won't be there.
For example, Fenton's reporting on BPD's nonreporting of rapes.
Housing not paying their judgments.
Other police scandals.
The fire academy debacle.
Mayor Dixon's foibles
and other assorted deals.
We need reporters who can dig.
I've gone back and forth over this, and I'll probably end up holding my nose and paying for it. There's a few reasons I'm vehemently opposed to this but not so many that I'd risk limiting my access to as much Baltimore info as possible.
Commenting is quite different from reading the newspaper. I get very little information from the Baltimore Sun. I'm offended by much of the stuff they print. It's not a mystery why their readership is falling off, the Baltimore Sun has failed to take even a modest look the 2010 Census.
If I were running the Baltimore Sun I would have fired even more people and hired a much more diverse group of reporters with different backgrounds and interests (much like the NYTs). I'd require they take more risks, utilize the power of the Internet and stay abreast on current trends. I'd insist that the Trib use their cutting-edge content with the other 15 Trib papers a la Chicago Trib and LA Times.
As far as the Sales Staff is concerned I would have also fired most of them, and gone with a more diverse group. I would have found a much more diverse group of advertisers for the website and branched out more, not insisting on a local base of customers. I would utilized 3rd party advertising sources. They have the hit content, the Sun could utilize it but they failed to do so. I would have also explored other ways to make money from the reputation of the Baltimore Sun, people may not pay for the paper but they will pay for a lot of other experiences.
The Sun has never harnessed its potential. As I said before, it's stuck in 1975.
I'm going to subscribe for one year and see if they use the additional revenue to improve the quality of their product. Their local coverage really isn't that great (I saw nothing about the CoA's recent decision in Miles v. State. I think that the fact that our state's highest court is taking more than THREE YEARS to issue decisions is newsworthy!) but if they use they money they get to improve that then the money will be worth it.
I've known a couple of Sun journalists and they seem like good, hard-working folks, but they can only do so much with limited resources. David Simon may be a bit of a crank, but he was right when he said that "do more with less" is bullshit. You do less with less.
They're just taking their marketing and PR strategy from Netflix
Post a Comment