As most of you know, many newspapers, such as The New York Times and Wall Street Journal, are implementing a paywall, which is essentially paying to access news content. What is your opinion of this? Would you pay to read the news? Working for a news organization myself, our news executivies thinks we don't need to do this but others do.
I would not pay to read the news. If i had to pay to get access to current events, i would got to the next resource. There are way to many free sources to get the news online and social networks such as facebook, twitter, and so on make it interactive. People can't keep their mouth close so i can get news for free without trying.
Considering there is so many free ways to access daily news, either by local television stations, by the internet, or just by going to a local Starbucks, I would be far better off simply going to look at it for free over paying it somewhere else.
Ha, no. If the internet, cable, other people, and radio were not avaliable then perhaps. Since they are - that's a definite no.
The only way I am prepared to pay to read the news is by buying a newspaper. I enjoy turning the pages of a real paper much more than flicking through pages online, so the only time I access the news online is if there's a really big event and I want to keep up with developments. Even then, I'm more likely to watch TV rather than access it online, so that's a big 'No' from me.
I don't see any sense in doing that. There are so many ways to get the same news. Even if it's an exclusive scoop, it will be leaked and all over the net in next to no time. So if they want to implement a paywall, that's their choice. I know where I will go for my news. Free.
That's a no from me, too. I get news from local TV in the morning. They cover more than just local stories, traffic and weather. They also cover national and international stories as well. It takes a half an hour and it is free. I would think that the newspaper websites would get enough money from advertising that they shouldn't need to have paywalls. It appears to me that they are being a bit greedy.
I would never pay to read the news. Pay in order to get fed lies? No thank you. They can keep their news. I will keep my positive nature and my sanity. I would, however, pay someone to get most of the news out of my face. That would be money well spent, for sure.
Right now, I don't see myself paying for news. Like Imoverthere, I would just go to Starbucks to read the newspaper. Also, my local library has subscriptions to most of the major newspapers.
Would definitely not pay for news. I like news but there is so much around us we get for free, I would not see the point of paying for it ! The only thing I would, maybe, pay for are analysis about news and still ....
No, I wouldn't. It really does make sense considering newspapers cost and people used to buy those regularly...so why not pay for online access now instead? But realistically, news has become completely free at this point for the most part, so it's kinda hard to go back to wanting to pay for it now.
Absolutely I would not pay this. I quit listening to the mainstream sources years ago when I realized that they were completely driven by propaganda, not actual news. I think that they will just cut their own throats because it will turn away many viewers who would otherwise see their ads. I don't want to get too specific here but I will only use alternative news sources for most stories anyway. Corporate control of these giant news sources has ruined the news. I mostly go to World Net Daily, Coast to Coast AM, Alex Jones, Newsmax and so forth.
I would never pay to read the news, why? Because news is depressing and if you want to have a very depressing day, just look at the news and listen and afterwards see just how you feel. Are you in a happy mood or a depressing mood. For all I care they could leave the news of the TV and anywhere else. I only like to hear good things and no bad things at all. I love to be happy and not all those crazy depressing thoughts and moods in my head. Give it a break!
No way! Even if, say, NY Times, started charging, there are soooo many other ways I can get the same stories for free. I think that is such a horrendous idea and those companies would experience a huge crash if they started charging. News is basically free now with the Internet and TV (assuming someone has them), so why would anyone want to start paying again?
Yes, I have a lot of other things I can do with my time beside listen or watch the news. That's a waste of your day. And now talking paying for such trash, I don't believe that will fly with anyone. If a person just must look or listen to that depressing junk, they can get it on the internet or the radio. People like me that do not really care what the news has to say because 9 times out of 10, it's not correct anyway. They are saying what they think you may want to hear and not the real truth anyway.
There are many free ways to access new so why to pay. Yes! if I am coming from the stream where I need to keep a count of records,then most probably but just for the news sake I would not spend a penny.
I wouldn't pay to read the news. I usually check out the news online or simply watch it on a news channel on the television. Why would you want to spend money on something when there are enough of sources to get the same information for free?
I have a couple of magazine subscriptions but I would never buy the news or have delivery service set up. I can get so much free news online and on TV. I spend all day on the computer anyway so going to yahoo news isn't going to change anything. My town also has 2 free newspapers with fully stocked dispensers in the parking garage at my job.
Oh no! I would never pay to read the news. It's always about a bunch of nonsense anyway. Plus it's so many free ways you get the news so that will be a definite no for me.
I wouldn't pay for reading news. I believe that information stream should remain free and out of boundaries. According to studies, most people are against paying for reading news. I also think it's unfair that only people who pay the particular site can obtain needed information. I'm afraid that in the future only the wealthiest of us will be able to afford to read the news.
