surprised more papers aren't doing a subscription version alongside a free version
― blueski, Thursday, 3 April 2008 12:55 (sixteen years ago) link
e.g. subscribe and get music and video downloads + offers
― blueski, Thursday, 3 April 2008 12:57 (sixteen years ago) link
theonion is free innit
― ken c, Thursday, 3 April 2008 12:57 (sixteen years ago) link
Subscription doesn't work online, the FT tried it and fucked it up monumentally. And if ppl aren't willing to pay for a reliable archive of business news they're certainly not going to be willing to pay for anything else. Except porn obviously.
― Matt DC, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:00 (sixteen years ago) link
gf I think that was the joek!
― stet, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:04 (sixteen years ago) link
but, yeh, people haven't been willing to pay for news since the advent of the radio -- it's all the other trinkets that papers were bought for, but internet has far better, shinier trinketry
― stet, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:05 (sixteen years ago) link
i'm not suggesting pay for News but for other things that papers can act as guides/filters for v well. subscription works for certain kinds of content e.g. music, video plus a few other things you'd otherwise have to pay for in print. i wouldn't expect it to work for something like the FT.
― blueski, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:06 (sixteen years ago) link
i only buy paper to pass the time when i'm on a train and do crosswords.
― ken c, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:09 (sixteen years ago) link
The worry is that news is the only thing newspapers do even half-well, so could they ever come up with music/video/etc stuff that would compete with here/you tube/4chan -- and compete well enough that people would stump up?
Going by current stabs at "video" I suspect not.
― stet, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:12 (sixteen years ago) link
i never buy papers so probably wouldn't pay for any form of online content either ah well there goes my argument (but people do pay for certain podcasts etc.)
― blueski, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:13 (sixteen years ago) link
That's exactly the sort of thinking I get at the office. "Well, I never pay for anything online [2s pause] so! We're going to monetise online advances in a flexible cross-title way! People might buy mugs branded with their favourite football team's colours from us"
― stet, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:22 (sixteen years ago) link
i do pay for music tho, and would pay for video downloads online depending on what they were (not pr0n) and the versatility of format (can i mess around with it in premiere with no fuss? itunes sez no). as usual tho i fear i am in distinct minority.
― blueski, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:26 (sixteen years ago) link
I think it's the right lines -- papers will need to take the GMG route and use money-making enterprises (auto trader, the radio stations) to prop up a wheezing news beast. Thing is very few people are making big money from website content anywhere, so it's pretty daunting.
Especially for publishers who still grasp the wrong end of a mouse.
― stet, Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:28 (sixteen years ago) link
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ruth_fowler/2008/04/club_rules.html
^^this broad really is pisspoor.
― banriquit, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 11:41 (sixteen years ago) link
Haven't we already done this one somewhere else?
― Dingbod Kesterson, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 11:42 (sixteen years ago) link
I think its a different, althought very similar piece.
I don't think I've seen so many strawmen in one place before. Who on earth are these people?
― laxalt, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 11:43 (sixteen years ago) link
A month or so ago I phoned up the Guardian and told them that Julie Burchill only had eight weeks to live, and that everyone in the media was frantically trying to find a replacement.
― Matt DC, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 11:49 (sixteen years ago) link
sounds plausible. jules could write, was the thing.
― banriquit, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 11:51 (sixteen years ago) link
She's not dead yet, don't try and rob her of those precious last four weeks!
― Matt DC, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 11:57 (sixteen years ago) link
I think Ruth Fowler deserves some respect for discovering this exciting new development.
― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:00 (sixteen years ago) link
Did you know she went to Cambridge?
― Neil S, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:03 (sixteen years ago) link
I guess what's funnier is the self-flagellation of the Graun for printing her.
― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:04 (sixteen years ago) link
Did you know she went to Cambridge.
Cue standard gag re. getting beaten by Kidderminster Harriers 4-1.
― Dingbod Kesterson, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:09 (sixteen years ago) link
And yet amazingly she also worked as a stripper!
― Raw Patrick, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:10 (sixteen years ago) link
Gotta top up those grants somehow.
― Dingbod Kesterson, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:11 (sixteen years ago) link
Maybe we should have a few weeks where we pick on a different broadsheet. This shit's embarrasing--like making fun of a retarded kid.
― Raw Patrick, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:12 (sixteen years ago) link
troo.
torygraph?
― banriquit, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:12 (sixteen years ago) link
You've gotta work your way up to that shit, start with the Times.
― Matt DC, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:15 (sixteen years ago) link
Damian Thompson's blog looks like a fertile source of OW MY HEAD
― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:17 (sixteen years ago) link
Times is even more of a joke than Guardian though?
― laxalt, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:17 (sixteen years ago) link
Interests of balance tho.
― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:19 (sixteen years ago) link
That's why The Times is a good starting point. Maybe the Indy as well but yeah political balance and shit. The Torygraph is more solid across the board but when they decide to be ridiculous they top everyone.
I give 'Comment Is Free' about a year, tops. Until the 'ooh blogging, how modern!' thing finally dies down and they realise they're just paying shit journalists for no reason and lacerating their brand in the process.
― Matt DC, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:19 (sixteen years ago) link
^^ i really hope so. this will sound ridic and precious, but stuff like the thing i linked to does actively put me off.
i give daily enrique links to the guardian about a year, tops.
― banriquit, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:22 (sixteen years ago) link
OTM.
Glad that Times thread has started, let's do that for a few weeks.
― Raw Patrick, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:40 (sixteen years ago) link
it's a game of opinions
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/tv/2008/05/it_was_while_watching_the.html
― Frogman Henry, Saturday, 24 May 2008 00:28 (sixteen years ago) link
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/27/religion
^^ this is guy is a choad.
― banriquit, Saturday, 21 June 2008 11:32 (sixteen years ago) link
united states independent music lovers:pitchfork media::british:guardian
― strgn, Saturday, 21 June 2008 12:30 (sixteen years ago) link
i wish there was a last call for internet connections
― strgn, Saturday, 21 June 2008 12:31 (sixteen years ago) link
This picture is eminently punchable http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/site_imagery/george_monbiot_140x140.jpg
― jim, Saturday, 21 June 2008 12:49 (sixteen years ago) link
What other "militant atheists" support the war in Iraq apart from Christopher Hitchens? That article is strawmannery gone mad.
― Bodrick III, Saturday, 21 June 2008 16:38 (sixteen years ago) link
particularly since iraq was a secular state. the paleo-conservative irony is that the war has created a space for religious nutjobs to win real victories; how anyone could see that as 'progressive' i don't know.
― banriquit, Saturday, 21 June 2008 16:44 (sixteen years ago) link
I don't think Milne is terrible, historically - but I think I disagree with him about religion. for those of us who do not believe in god or gods, it would surely seem hypocritical to look to religion for our progressive salvation etc.
― the pinefox, Saturday, 21 June 2008 19:15 (sixteen years ago) link
I mean, it's a cynical case, in a way? 'I don't agree with these people's most fundamental beliefs but they seem useful right now'?
― the pinefox, Saturday, 21 June 2008 19:16 (sixteen years ago) link
and that's assuming that they are indeed useful
Today Richard Williams said, of last night's game, "a headed goal for each side" or something to that effect.
Is it really too much to ask for someone to actually have seen the game? Not least when he's their supposed "expert".
― Ronan, Saturday, 21 June 2008 19:17 (sixteen years ago) link
^ roffle
― Frogman Henry, Saturday, 21 June 2008 20:00 (sixteen years ago) link
Kevin McCarra's an idiot too.
― Neil S, Saturday, 21 June 2008 20:01 (sixteen years ago) link
I don't mind McCarra that much, I have to say can't stand Williams tho. Just standard aged meanderings.
― Ronan, Saturday, 21 June 2008 20:02 (sixteen years ago) link
Williams gets wheeled out for a whole range of different subjects as well. Manages to be a bore about football, music, art, whatever really.
― Neil S, Saturday, 21 June 2008 20:05 (sixteen years ago) link
yeah same views on every single subject
― Ronan, Saturday, 21 June 2008 20:06 (sixteen years ago) link