How Murdoch's Paywalls Meant Some News It Broke Went Unnoticed & Uncredited
from the whoops dept
The saga of how ridiculously disappointing News Corps.' paywalls have been continues. We've already seen that the number of subscribers looks dismal, advertisers are running away and even publicists are avoiding pitching The Times stories, because it's just not worth it, considering the diminished audience. Now, as a bunch of you sent in, it's gotten so bad that when The Times actually breaks a story, almost no one notices -- and the eventual "credit" for breaking the story goes elsewhere.Apparently, The Times first had a particular political insider story concerning UK politics -- but the story got almost no attention until nine days later when a blog called Labour Uncut re-"broke" the story and got all the credit for it. That seems only likely to drive tipsters to make sure to avoid the Murdoch paywalled papers even more.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: journalism, paywalls
Companies: news corp
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
bloging
For a blogger, paywalls could be VERY beneficial. if no one else is reading the stories, they can subscribe to a few sources, copy/paste, reword a few things, and publish important stories that no one else has seen, and they get to take all the credit, and earn a few pennies from adsense while they're at it.
Brilliant!
The only loser is the owner of the pay-walled site!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: bloging
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: bloging
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: bloging
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: bloging
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I have to wonder if the dead tree version is now sold in a plain paper wrapper, to prevent 'theft' of their stories from passers by.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heh.
"Paul Staines says:
November 12, 2010 at 3:12 pm
As seen in the Times a couple of weeks ago."
I would like to ask this guy "By who?" but I don't know enough about prime ministers to defeat their spam thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Heh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Many suffer because of Murdoch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's a PR Dream
By the time anyone notices it'll be old news.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's a PR Dream
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
snicker
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe no TImes readers cared.
[Sometimes your lousy grammar *cannot* be overlooked:
You've a habit of duplicating words in the same sentence.
"The continuing saga of how ridiculously disappointing News Corps.' paywalls have been continued."
It doesn't scan or parse. Might if last word was "continues" but still unnecessarily duplicates words.]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe no TImes readers cared.
It might if the last word was "continues", but it still unnecessarily duplicates words.
There, I corrected your bad grammar.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paying subscribers get stories 9 days before anyone else?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Paying subscribers get stories 9 days before anyone else?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A sign of The Times
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's Not News When....
Even Murdoch must understand that. Or you'd think he would.
Then again, he's the man who almost singlehandedly destroyed Australian journalism by buying up everything in sight before he moved on the Europe and now the United States to do the same thing there.
While it's sad to see the decline and impending fall of one of the "newspapers of record" in the English speaking world perhaps it will convince it's namesake in New York to put the brakes on it's plans to hide behind a paywall. Then again, maybe not.
The Wall Street Journal gets away with it, sort of, because it has pretty much got a captive audience who aren't convinced they can get the "inside dirt" on the financial industry anywhere else.
Come to think of it, how many stories do you see since THAT paywall went up that credit the WSJ for anything?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
story
We missed the story like all the other political press (although it now appears the Times didn't help themselves by spiking the story with a throw away line rather than going big on the story). A week or so later we heard about it from sources and reported it.
So we were late to the party with everyone else, and still got the credit for breaking the story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]