the guardian's dying

semi-pro waster said:
While it might be fun to watch the Guardian squirm if you're taking a slightly longer term view I don't think this is a good thing - it tends to be better if there's a variety of opinions across the political spectrum available. I ?
Click to expand...

I can't agree, there's ever angle covered online by many free sites.
This is a terriable idea and isn't needed to keep news going. News and all sides of opinion will carry on fine, without a single printed source.
 
Newspapers are just a bit old hat, who wants to pay to read 1 or 2 day old news anymore. The reason the DM etc do well is because the older population buy them. When that generation dies off I think the newspapers will too.
 
Am i the only one thinking how come they can't set up a profitable but free to the use website, like many many other successful websites have?
 
semi-pro waster said:
If popularity is a measure of quality then X-Factor has to be good by that metric? I'd argue it's dross designed to appeal to a mass-market while having the benefits of being cheap to produce and the ability to derive multiple additional revenue streams but then again - what do I know?
Click to expand...


It's a talent show, it's one of the oldest kinds of tv show or entertainment in general there is.
 
I fully realise the old chestnut about representation of the sides, however with the creation of the internet, such things are trivial and pointless to the newer generation, which is why it will not survive.

I did not desire the banks to be saved and I certainly do not wish the newspapers to be saved either.

Such a STUPID precedent was set here.
 
I can think of several ways that they could modernise their business model and generate new revenues.

Reduce the price of online subscriptions to very low amounts per month and make money off volume of subscribers.
Have premium website membership option that gives more features. (a lot of sites do this)
Have a donation based subscription model that offers subscribers benefits for "keep the newspaper free"
Host people's blogs but charge people to do it. You will get some people who will pay to have their blog posted on the front page or printed in the paper.
 
I'd happily pay to use their website, I buy the paper but not every day. The App (update it for the iPhone 5 please! :p) is brilliant.
 
What next a £50 a month charge to prop up failing highstreet stores as people take their business online?

The world is changing and unfortunatly and sadly newspapers are being left behind and there is no real financial model for similiar that works online.
 
Glaucus said:
I can't agree, there's ever angle covered online by many free sites.
This is a terriable idea and isn't needed to keep news going. News and all sides of opinion will carry on fine, without a single printed source.
Click to expand...

I can see semi's point, you get better resources from media company's, more researchers, a bigger spread of journalists. With blogs and social media it cannot be held to the same scrutinization and newspapers, not that it has been. I know the offerings from Google, Apple and Microsoft is to bring all the sources to you but there's still something not quite there with the newer technologies that the old sources offer. Not enough to prop it up though.

There's also the international aspect, I find myself regularly browsing news outlets from other country's.
 
I'd be pretty annoyed if The Guardian closed, mainly because it's one of my most browsed websites. I'd dearly miss Football Weekly and the generally high quality sports writing. It's a site I would definitely consider paying to use.
 
nydryl said:
I'd be pretty annoyed if The Guardian closed, mainly because it's one of my most browsed websites. I'd dearly miss Football Weekly and the generally high quality sports writing. It's a site I would definitely consider paying to use.
Click to expand...
It's funny how much you value it but would only consider paying for it?
 
I'd always assumed papers made their money from advertising anyway, I mean when you consider all the colour ink, paper and the logistical costs of suppling every newsagent in the country with the latest copy everyday you'd think that would exceed the relatively small purchase price they ask for.

OK so the broadsheets are more expensive but there's no way the tabloids are making money from the 30ps they charge for their papers are they?
 
Hatter The Mad said:
It's funny how much you value it but would only consider paying for it?
Click to expand...

Well if they charged £20 a month I wouldn't pay. If the content greatly decreased I wouldn't pay. If they forced me to give the editor a reach around every day I wouldn't pay.

It would be a bit silly to say I would definitely pay for it.
 
Muffin` said:
A drop in revenue is indicative of a falling readers, this is because people are getting their news elsewhere. I do not think it's a financial issue for its readers, all papers are competitively priced and their website is still free and just as easy to access. I think the fall is due to the opinions the paper pushes, it's no longer the liberal paper it once was and I can't give it the same credit for it's rational. I think it's sanctimonious of it's critisim of soceity and the world.

The UK propping up failing businesses when consumers have gone elsewhere is a line we do not want to go down again. The world is changing, it needs to change with it. If people don't buy your paper because you're vilifying bankers and tax dodgers (whilst parting in it yourself no less) whilst defending the dregs and Socialist Dinosaurs then it's time to change your opinion if you want to stay in business.
Click to expand...

Most print media is struggling to an extent is it not? Is it just down to the opinions or could it also be the case that the "type" of people who would read the Guardian are more likely to get their news online anyway? It's certainly arguable either way that the readers are at least partially at fault for some of the issues that the newspaper finds itself in. I can see the point though that this is a less than ideal solution in many ways and may simply be delaying the inevitable if adopted - then again it's possible it would just give enough time for the industry to adapt.

I should take some share of the blame as well, I don't tend to purchase many newspapers at all currently and if I want a varied press I probably should do. However I rarely have sufficient time to devote to reading a paper as I'd want to and I'd rather not waste them so if an alternative such as subsidising a varied press was an option then I'd not necessarily be averse to that - that's in much the same way that I don't begrudge paying my TV licence despite the fact that the majority of what is on the BBC isn't of any interest to me.

Glaucus said:
I can't agree, there's ever angle covered online by many free sites.
This is a terriable idea and isn't needed to keep news going. News and all sides of opinion will carry on fine, without a single printed source.
Click to expand...

While you can get opinions from a wide range of people online there's an awful lot of news aggregators so you might only have a very small number of fresh reports with dozens of people re-reporting the same basic information. As has been pointed out good journalism tends to cost money and if you're not getting income from the sales of the paper then you need another revenue stream, the obvious approach may be to have more adverts but is that a temporary solution or a full cure to the issue?

Tefal said:
It's a talent show, it's one of the oldest kinds of tv show or entertainment in general there is.
Click to expand...

I wasn't arguing that the X-Factor was novel or original in any way, shape or form but the format is designed to be cheap to produce and to generate multiple revenue streams - the milking of those streams is perhaps the most innovative part of it and even then it's not as if most of the opportunities haven't been used somewhere before albeit perhaps not as well. Dross is an subjective judgement but one I feel fairly comfortable with here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom