Watch CPAC 2012 Live
-
Why Doesn’t Obama Ban Iranian Press TV? by Kenneth R. Timmerman
The Case of CH2M HILL: $2 Billion in Crony Stimulation by Rusty Weiss
The Truth about George Soros by AIM Staff
Lifting the Veil on WikiLeaks by AIM Staff
The Truth about Al-Jazeera English by Cliff Kincaid
Reaganomics and Obamanomics in the Media and in Reality by Malcolm A. Kline, Don Irvine and Spencer Irvine
How State Budget Battles Could Mean More Criminals Back on the Streets by Michael Tremoglie
Radical Muslims, Environmentalists and the Green Jihad by Mark Musser
Russian-Backed Propaganda Networks Claim Obama is a CIA Agent by Cliff Kincaid
Media Conceal True Nature of Flash Mob Racial Violence by John T. Bennett
NBC’s Mitchell Should Resign Over Telling Gaddafi’s Lies (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) by Cliff Kincaid
CASA de Maryland: The Illegals’ ACORN by James Simpson
Special Report
The Newswire
Take AIM Podcast
The Wall Street Journal may be the most indispensible newspaper in America based on its fee structure for subscribers of print, online and smart phones.
From FishbowlLA
Rafe Needleman pays $100 a year for his online subscription to the Wall Street Journal. As he writes for CNET, he recently discovered just how far his money doesn’t go:
I recently downloaded the iPhone app for the WSJ, and discovered that getting access to the stories that I’m paying for already on the Web was going to cost me another $52 a year. And that’s the discounted rate for existing subscribers. iPhone and BlackBerry app access is $78 a year if you don’t already have either a Web or print subscription. It’s only if you subscribe to both the Web and print editions of the WSJ that you get iPhone app access for “free.”
To read WSJ on the Amazon Kindle involves yet another hefty fee. That’s an awful lot of cabbage for just one paper, especially when Google news is free.
I use a blackberry and downloaded the WSJ app only to find out that a subscription fee was required even though I am a print subscriber. I’d be willing to pay a few bucks for full access but $78 on top of the nearly $200 I’m already paying for the print edition? No thank you.
Nevertheless the Journal is the envy of the newspaper industry as it has been able to not only weather the downturn better than most but has a successful online model as well.
Post #2512
Share This
About the author
Don Irvine is Chairman of Accuracy in Media. He is active on Facebook and Twitter. You can follow him @donirvine to read his latest thoughts.
3 Comments for WSJ Makes Readers Pay ( A Lot)
pay for content model is dead, defunct. there will be plenty of writers hungry to provide stories to online publishers and plenty of advertisers chomping to get their message on the pages readers prefer. holding back the advertisers to keep content quality up will be the new challenge for online publishers
Personally, I can’t really accuse or condemn Murdoch and Dow Jones of anything. It’s his prerogative, and I wouldn’t expect conservatives or libertarians having a problem with it. It’s just a little odd and questionable, seeing as how WSJ is already #1 and they’re willing to risk it to make an extra buck. Having said that, I’m sure they know what they’re doing.
Is this really a surprise. Murdock owns it you know damn well he’ll do anything for a dollar.
On a side note since this website is about the media, has anyone noticed how big of a deal the news media is making of the snow. We had three feet were I live last year and I didn’t hear a peep from the news about that. It just shows how ego maniacs they are, “it affects us so we’ll talk about it for days, if affects you, we don’t care.” Pathetic.