More commonly known as a paywall.
What do you guys think? Are you willing to pay for news? Or do you think 15 articles a month is enough?
Want to be even more depressed about the future of journalism than you already were? Read the comments on this post. Not surprising, but upsetting nonetheless.
(Source: Los Angeles Times)
reinfriedmarass liked this
rebecca-c answered:
I object.
daruiburns answered:
I would pay for news if it meant no ads, but they’re going to be there anyways so what’s the point?
muhss answered:
terrible idea
wirela reblogged this from latimes
dotdotdotdoh answered:
maybe and it depends on how in depth the articles areeeee
battleblogs answered:
Anything that gets you out from under the vulture capitalist, Mr Zell, and stabilizes your finances so you can focus gets my vote
lifeofbk answered:
Absolutely not. News is free for consumption. We are not the ones you should be milking.
yssey liked this
nateog reblogged this from latimes
rabliag liked this
rev320productions liked this
sunfell answered:
Sadly, this means another tap on my already narrowed resources. It adds up after a while.
ohmic answered:
nope, i’m sure I can find it for free
weon answered:
I’ll pay for Nateog’s reportage in the LATimes Tech blog.
doriansky answered:
Paywall model is obsolete.
csgazette liked this
katherinestasaph liked this
judyxberman reblogged this from latimes and added:
be even more depressed about the future of journalism than...already were? Read the...
minheeshock answered:
no, i wouldn’t pay
tawkwardturtle answered:
I admit, grudgingly, 15 articles from one, good newspaper a month is sufficient considering the amount of information available on the web.
tobeagoodman answered:
I am HAPPY to pay. I read the LA Times every morning at my desk. $1 a month is the least I can do.
gleemie answered:
Yeah, I’d pay for the times. I like the “up to a certain number of articles a month” free model. Please make payment easy e.g. goog checkout
5mins-to-midnight answered:
Hahaha…paying for news
dinfinite answered:
I think that in a day and age where news is available from thousands of sources worldwide… y’all may be elite, but you aint that special.
dbloom answered:
15 to 18 articles/month reasonable for drive-by consumption. You need to keep investing in superior product to make paying worthwhile
moxielindsey85 answered:
I’m not willing to pay for news because I get all my news for free
bibliotecadipele answered:
hum … PQ good
comedyinacan answered:
Absolutely not willing to pay for the news. If I ever change my mind it is very unlikely that I pay for LATimes, WSJ and NYT would come first
con-tem-plate answered:
echo what everyone said before.
tumblingalma liked this
everchangingpicture3 answered:
I wil never pay for something I can get for free, that’s jut stupid!
dave1963x answered:
no. it’s everywhere for free.
mrhalfway answered:
If the SF Chronicle delivered the kind of quality the LA Times did, I would pay for it in a heartbeat. The Chronicle sucks.
voguefemme answered:
Puhleeze. What value do you offer for this? NOTHING. I can read news for free on Google.
caity88 answered:
not willing to pay for the news and 15 articles a month is nothing.
gorejusgeorge answered:
Just so you know, its really easy to bypass the NYT’s paywall, so word of advice don’t use their system
suhhfurtado answered:
‘———————’
latimes posted this
