Newspaper: The Effect of Online Technology

Based on the handout you've read and the links provided, answer these questions on your blog with detailed, in-depth paragraphs. Remember, critical autonomy means forming your own opinions on these issues.

 Do you agree with James Murdoch that the BBC should not be allowed to provide free news online? Why?

I do not agree. Because the audience have been consuming online news for free from the beginning, the BBC are also incredibly successful and are funded by the TV licence so there isn't a massive financial downfall with providing free content. Furthermore their news can also be said to be free to a certain extent as they are funded by the TV licence, the point of consumption is always free once that has been paid and the licence isn't just directly for the BBC's content. So making consumers pay for their news online would in fact harm them as their content is already somewhat free and would cause the online platform to be sidelined.
2) Read this blog on the Times paywall three years on.

3) Was Rupert Murdoch right to put his news content (The Times, The Sunday Times) behind a paywall?

In a sense he was wrong as Smith rightly suggests that the money the subscriptions make will not counteract their constant loss of profit and the point where Murdoch won't be able to subsidise using money from other News Corp. Companies is still close. Furthermore there is also the suggestion that brand names aren't as important as they one were because people will click a suggested link or one that they've found on social media and will read an article not taking into consideration who wrote it. However they have gone from zero to 140 000 online customers, meaning it is more successful than other competitors.
4) Choose two comments from below the Times paywall article - one that argues in favour of the paywall and one that argues against. Copy a quote from each and explain which YOU agree with and why.

pauljaymes • 3 years ago

In any business, success depends on delivering one of three things to customers: lowest cost, differential quality, or a niche unavailable elsewhere. Newsprint is no exception, but the lowest cost product in the marketplace is set at zero.

The Times isn't niche, that's the like of aviation monthly, so it has to deliver a product of sufficient quality for readers to be willing to pay the premium. Is it doing this? I would say not really, more work is needed, and it's hard to see how the quality can improve with costs being cut.

blackswede • 3 years ago

It is so ridiculous if these mainstream newspapers believe that they can "force readership of fee-based news. One can get the same "news" for free almost anywhere on the internet. I'd take a hint from the alternative free weeklies that survive just off their local advertising. I don't think anyone would read them otherwise. These papers are full of paid advertising. The fee model will never work.

I agree with the first comment as the lack of funding is making it more difficult for institutions to create unique and quality content that would encourage the audience to purchase their news.
I don't agree with the second comment because the fee model has already been proven to work in certain cases. For the financial times, their niche audience and demographic means that they will pay for the exclusive content that benefits them.

6) Why do you think the Evening Standard has bucked the trend and increased circulation and profit in the last two years?

Readership for British national newspapers has fallen by 13%, The independent has had the biggest fall in readership at 34%. The evening standard is an anomaly with a 27%  increase in irculation recorded by the ABC.Being on London may have an impact, are large population know for public commutes mean newspapers are more appealing as a source of entertainment, and are also left on vehicles such as trains to be picked up by others.

7) Is there any hope for the newspaper industry or will it eventually die out? Provide a detailed response to this question explaining and justifying your opinion. 

I think that the newspaper industry will potentially die out but the news industry won't providing institutions cater for the needs and requirements of the online consumers. It isn't even a matter of  the older generations still needing papers for the news as most now consume news on TV. This is not surprising, however, Shirky had stated that 'no medium lasts for more than an average of 25 years,' so it is about time that the main news medium changed. The real problem is people ignoring the need for change. But this only affects how news is produced and not news itself. it has become a Habitual action for people to check social media, particularly the trends which contain the news that people consume, even though there is a lack of gatekeepers and people checking the information, on the most part it is factual and up to date. 

Overall I don't believe that the newspaper industry will die out as such, it will just progress onto another platform.