Home Videos Photos
Home >> Media Minute , Business Blitz >> Will U Pay???

Will U Pay???

Filed under: Media Minute > Business Blitz

The Financial Times is predicting that "almost all" news organisations will be charging for online content within a year.

That's lame!

    Posted: Jul 16, 2009 at 10:44 am / Email this  »
    « Previous story
    DEA Seeks New Limitations On Drug Used By Michael Jackson
    Next story »
    Kristin On Board for TWO Seasons!
    See All 55 Comments

    55 comments to “Will U Pay???”



    1. 1

      Hell no thats what t.v is for. Can you say…..economy?



    2. 2

      those who don't charge and rely on advertisers for their revenue will do much, much better than the ones that do charge.



    3. 3

      I WONT PAY FOR THIS ONLINE BULLSHIT….



    4. 4

      I already pay for internet service……Hell no i wont be paying to READ something online. People are getting more and more greedy by the second!!!

      ay dios mio.



    5. 5

      you guys are such traitors. perez…u're the one that is always so sad when a magazine falls. don't you understand this is the only way these companies will stay alive? we can't always get everything for free. our economy will forever be in a shithole if people aren't willing to spend more money. cheapass..



    6. 6

      no effen way…
      like we
      freakin
      believe
      what they say
      anyway…I'm not
      brainwazhed into
      their stupidazzworld..
      I GET MY NEWZ HERE.

    7. buck says – reply to this


      7

      thats a great idea, then Obam can tax it.



    8. 8

      Perez should be paying us for this nonsense..



    9. 9

      Indeed - so lame! I don't give that much a of a shit about what's going on to pay to read about it.



    10. 10

      I've heard abou this already, they want you to pick packages like you would for satellite TV. Or pay for each individual site you want to veiw on a regular basis. It's not about the economy, it's about the total freedom of the internet. We're jsut sheep remember, we were never supposed to have such luxuries.



    11. 11

      NO. PERIOD.



    12. 12

      no, i already pay for my tv, i will read no news i have to pay for.



    13. 13

      It makes total sense, you morons. You pay to buy an issue of a magazine or a newspaper. Papers and magazines are folding because the online content is free and sales are down. Think about it.



    14. 14

      If that happens then it'll be a retarded move. Lets see how much CNN can make from online advertising when their daily page visits go from 10 million hits per day to 500,000.



    15. 15

      no way. i've got better things to spend my money on.

    16. epic says – reply to this


      16

      no, i won't pay - financial crisis, you know..



    17. 17

      …nah. I will count on this site for all of my investment needs. "The money's in the basement."



    18. 18

      Re: SheriMoonFireFly – …right on SheriMoonFireFly



    19. 19

      They have to survive. Journalists need to feed their kids. People can't keep stealing stories someone has worked their ass over and claim it their own. Advertising revenue can not sustain the industry. DON'T YOU ALL READ!
      .
      It has to stop.
      I agree in paying a minimal fee as I do for my daily paper.
      GET REAL PEOPLE.
      .
      Problem these days is we have too many people who feel they should get all for not and then bitch about it.
      .
      Self entitled bullshit has GOT TO GO!
      .

      .
      Other than that, good day all!



    20. 20

      HELL TO THE NO!!! I already pay for Internet DSL and my computer!! They can get their revenue from the advertisers!!



    21. 21

      Re: bizzatch – 13 One person with common sense. Thank you.



    22. 22

      Re: buck – YOU KNOW FUCK BUCK!



    23. 23

      NO, NO, NO!! The publications should be happy they are saving on paper and printing costs!! They should PAY US to read their crap!!



    24. 24

      Re: emlovr – 5 Preach it!



    25. 25

      Why is it lame? You pay for a newspaper or magazine so why should the same content in a different form be free?



    26. 26

      Organisations? You mean organizations.



    27. 27

      The New York Times already FAILed at this a few years ago. If you know your way around the internet, you can find a way to get this content anyways. I won't pay for it.

      Besides, modern journalism is still finding its way in the digital age. I think bloggers will be even MORE relied upon if news organizations choose to go this route.



    28. 28

      It wont work. There will always be someone giving it up for free. The big news organizations might try to all get together to do it, but that is called price fixing. It's illegal in the U.S. I'll be ready with my class action lawsuit.



    29. 29

      no way. can you imagine pay to read new york times, cnn, msnbc, no, never. it not worth it.



    30. 30

      No, I will not pay for tabloids like CNN and Foxnews to propagandize to me. That is why I do not have cable. This is not a "prediction." This is an assertion which was established at the 2009 June Bilderberg meeting in Athens, Greece. They are simply trying to prepare you. Perez Hilton who has never even seen a Financial Times issue, was instructed to make that post by his new owners. The Bilderberg's love Perez because he is nothing more than a roach. He will do and say anything for money and they never have to worry about him having a conscience about anything. Even if he had the intellect to understand what was going on around him, roaches simply do not have a conscience. They are not capable of caring when they ruin everything around them simply because they are being roaches.



    31. 31

      Not only will I not pay, if enough people stop visitng those sites altogether (knowing it's pointless to go to them if they're going to have to pay) than they'll lose their advertising sponsors and their selfish money grubbing plan will backfire and they'll be worse off



    32. 32

      Re: Sarah FAILin – Re: McBain – Re: mochito – THEN YOU HAVE ALL DOOMED PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISM.
      .
      HOW WILL THE INDIVIDUAL BLOGGING GET THE TRUTH OUT OF VARIOUS SITUATIONS AROUND THE WORLD?
      WHO WILL PAY THE AIRFARE? WHO WILL PAY FOR THEIR MORTGAGE OR FOOD WHILE THEY ARE OUT RESEARCHING?
      YA, SOME AFGAN VILLAGER WILL BLOG ABOUT THE POT SMOKING COPS.
      OH, DICK CHENEY WILL GLADLY COME FORTH ABOUT OUTING CIA OPERATIVES.
      .
      STUPID FUCKERS!
      .
      SELFISH FUCKERS!
      .
      DUMB IGNORANT FUCKERS!
      .
      FUCK YOU ALL!
      .
      EVERYONE WANTS SOMETHING FOR FREE. WHY THE FUCK DO YOU THINK THE WORLD IS IN THIS FINANCIAL CRISIS?
      .
      DUMBFUCKS LIKE YOU!



    33. 33

      Re: mynameis? – 31 FUCK YOU STUPID FUCK. People are just doing their jobs as they have for decades.
      .
      Why don't you work for free?
      .
      I AM APALED AT THE IGNORANCE DISPLAYED IN THIS COMMENT SECTION.



    34. 34

      FUCK NO!



    35. 35

      Re: SWEETPIECE! – damn sp, little emotional over this one… i take it this has something to do with your occupation?



    36. 36

      CAN you say economy? Every newspaper in the US has suspended international operations, almost every broadcaster is laying off by the droves, and why? Consumers get their news for free online. News organizations are desperate to find a sustainable business model that will fund the thousands they need to fund these trips, pay these journalists, ensure their security and pay for the costs of newsgathering. The main source of income was never advertising.



    37. 37

      Re: JigSaw – 35 Nope. But in the fam. And, I see the bullshit. Gen X.



    38. 38

      Re: mode1782 – This is the master plan. Keep us dumb and uninformed.
      .



    39. 39

      thats why the ONES that don't will still be alive NEXT YEAR better find a way to get it done

    40. MP says – reply to this


      40

      I get the NYT delivered to my inbox every morning. A couple years ago they started charging for certain op-ed columns. I don't think it was successful, as they don't do it anymore. I can't really see the general masses paying to read the paper online. I read 2 local papers online every day and I wouldn't pay a dime for them. Maybe if papers weren't so blatantly partisan they would do better.



    41. 41

      fuck them, Ill just get the same news at one of the other million news sites that offer the exact same story free



    42. 42

      and wtf are some of you talking about, online costs are far lower than sending out copies of papers on a regular basis. They still get ads to finance them and allow more accessibility. What writer's are going out of business over that ? If they suck, they'll be fired



    43. 43

      Why don't they just put too many ads on their page like you?



    44. 44

      heck nooo thats ridiculous! you can't charge for news.



    45. 45

      people should absolutely pay. While the internet Wikipedia and google and yahoo are free, there are credible journalists and credible newspapers that are literally GIVING THEIR PRODUCTS AWAY for free online. Something has to change, people need to pay for credible news.



    46. 46

      Re: detzold – 44 Another idiot! People have been paying for news for centuries!
      If you want bad pop news, turn on the TV.
      The only way to know what is going on is to get your news from multiple sources. Guess what, journalists need to make a living too!
      .
      DUMB AND UNINFORMED!
      .
      JOIN THE MILITARY AND GET USED.
      .
      DON'T THINK.
      .
      There you go, now are you happy?



    47. 47

      well I guess if you don't have cable or satellite t.v. you're doomed to be an ignorant fuck in these economic times.



    48. 48

      I don't need any news THAT badly… maybe I'll finally get to all those books I've been meaning to read



    49. 49

      That sucks!!!!!!!!! and NO!



    50. 50

      ALL YOU CONSERVATIVES, WHAT DID THE FOUNDING FATHERS DIE FOR?
      FREEDOM OF THE PRESS!
      .
      STUPID STUPID FOOLS!

    51. @v@ says – reply to this


      51

      Who cares. No one believes mainstream media anymore for the most part anyway since they so severely dropped the ball over the last decade. Those that turned to the net to post news freely will continue to do so, and they will get all of the traffic, AND the advertising. That's what happened in the first place, and why so many media arms are in financial doo-doo. Do they think charging mo'money will solve things?



    52. 52

      Actually, this step is important to keep responsible news organizations, with many bureaus in many foreign and domestic cities, able to continue providing the news we need to make informed decisions. Advertiser-fueled news sites aren't going to provide the objective, well-sourced information we need. Voting responsibly depends on it.



    53. 53

      don't do it perez!!!



    54. 54

      It's not LAME, how do you think they pay to fly reporters to the big news stories? If they don't charge, they'll all go out of business.



    55. 55

      Wow, after reading the comments it's horrifying how ignorant and arrogant our youth is. You'll just get it somewhere else? Where? Perez Hilton? Who will be researching and writing the stories, you retards? Paparazzi? No one would pay for THIS site. You know who deserves it? The fucking New York Times.