The most recent comment, No. 434, by reader smalls, on the Tallahassee Democrat's announced plan yesterday to erect a paywall, on July 1:
I stopped getting the printed version of the Democrat because service was horrible and there were many times I didn't even get my paper. I would come to Tallahassee Democrat Online because I liked to see what others thought of the news. The reporting is sub-par at best, and with all the grammatical errors you should just hire my nine year old and she would probably do a better job. Goodbye Democrap! There are way better sites out there that I can get my new from for free and I can print coupons online. There is no way I would pay for this monstrosity that calls itself a newspaper, or its crappy website.
Earlier: Tallahassee Democrat is first of three Gannett papers to announce paywall
Thursday, June 24, 2010
16 comments:
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If my paper started charging, I expect comments would be similar. Gannett has weakened its products -- digital and online -- substantially over the past three or four years. Now, after doing that, it's trying to convince readers that they still have value. Good luck with that!
ReplyDeleteWhile reaction is sure to be negative, Jim, do you REALLY think highlighting that comment is a fair indication of how readers are reacting?
ReplyDeleteIt's that kind of juvenile journalism that makes this blog so untrustworthy.
Again, there is no doubt reaction will be negative, but surely the debate can kick off with a more reasonable example of reaction.
The truth is not found in the extremes, but in the great unreported middle. Your honiest reporting on these paywalls is severely compromised when you post something like that. Did you giggle in glee?
Really disappointed.
A journalist who used to work with you
I'm sorry you're disappointed, but:
ReplyDeleteHow many of these comments did you read? Which of those would have been a better example?
Between yesterday and today, I've read dozens, perhaps even 100. This comment happened to be the most recent posted when I clicked on the story this morning -- yet it's absolutely representative of the vast majority of those posted (once you eliminate those that are off-topic).
I could have paired this comment with a positive one, but that would have been misleading -- an example of the false "balance'' that too many newspapers try to achieve in a too quick and easy way.
I am not arguing you needed a "positive" comment. Not at all.
ReplyDeleteBut someone calling the newspaper a "monstrosity" and the website "crappy" etc., is just a neighborhood nut. Reasonable criticism, people upset by the paywall, I'll never buy the paper again and such is fine.
As I said, I expect the reaction to be negative.
But some nutcase going overboard is just the antithesis of reasonable discussion.
If this was a public hearing, is that the guy you would have quoted in a story?
I expect better from a journalist.
4:02 pm: I think your point is well-taken, and I'll try to do a better job next time.
ReplyDeleteI looked at the reader response, and think Jim chose a representative sample of the sentiment. Yes, if this were a hearing, I would have quoted him. It was an interesting comment and as I said, reflected a majority view. Mind you, people who are posting aren't raving about having to pay for their online usage, but would we expect that? I think Jim goes overboard to try to be fair, and he does fine journalism that even breaks news about Gannett from time to time. You are just being picky, and over-critical. He highlights some front page successes at Gannett papers, and when the stock goes up. Today it went down, and he noted it only in a posting that was a response to a comment. If you don't like it, my view is don't read it. Better still, why not start your own blog and post how the paywall is being received without much dissent by readers.
ReplyDeleteA single comment from a real reader means so very much more to me than any of the comments from the clueless Gannett officials.
ReplyDeleteI read about 300 comments; they ran about 8- or 9-to-1 along the lines of the one Jim used.
ReplyDeleteThere's a lot more to this story to come.
Soon.
"I think Jim goes overboard to try to be fair"
ReplyDeleteAnyone who writes something like that has not been reading. 7:54 has no credibility here.
Also, no one should expect anything from Jim other than rumormongering. He has proved that time and again.
Rumormongering? I get more facts about what is happening at Gannett here than I find anywhere else.
ReplyDeleteIn early 2009, yes a whole year-and-a-half ago - we put a so-called "wall" on our website. Subscribers got the whole website free, access to everything. Non-subscribers got much of the site free, but had to pay for the electronic page-by-page version of the paper, obits and archives. Yes, there was some grumbling at first.
ReplyDeleteBUT, the key for us was making sure the website is lively, interactive, linked to our large FaceBook, newsletter and MySpace sites, and is updated all the time. And we are just a small daily with no single "dedicated" staffer working on just the website. It is all done in our newsroom.
AND, we make a lot of revenue off the paid side, in monthly and annual online subscriptions.
This is NOT rocket science folks. It shouldn't take forever to come up with a "model" for a paid website... just do it, and do it right. Give readers tons of online content, and no crap.
If our little daily can do it with few problems and a small staff, why is it such torture for Gannett?
Hey 11:46am: Please apply to work in Tallahassee, you wold be a big asset there.
ReplyDeleteEven if you have to kiss the big 'asset' there to get the job.
Crap doesn't magically turn to gold just because its posted online and it's local-local. Readers won't pay for a bad newspaper and they won't pay for a clunky website, which in some respects is worse than the print product.
ReplyDeleteFor example, they are beating on reporters at my site to post more stories online. Whoever slings the most drivel online is the executive editor's pet employee. The rest of us are viewed as slackers.
Most of this stuff is cut-and-paste jobs from press releases, or three sentence updates about some minor police or traffic issue. Readers can go to the same websites as we do and get the latest press release from the cops or school district. They can turn on the TV and get just as much in-depth reporting.
As for the "community news" we post online to meet our quota, who the hell cares? I suppose somebody might be thrilled about the sidewalk sale at the local strip mall. We waste time on the most remarkably lame, non-stories imaginable.
The weekly non-Gannett papers in my area all have websites. How difficult will it be for them to compete with big, bad Gannett at this point?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteGosh 4:15 pm it must be difficult to work with people that are so much more stupid than you. Of course you've never run a business, never run a website, never run a newsroom but hell everyone but you is stupid. You my friend ae what is wrong with our business. You and every one of your negative, hate your own life buddies who NEVER have a positive thing to say about anything or anyone who even attempts to do something different. The websites around Gannett land get millions and millions of monthly unique visitors. Why would millions of people go to websites like the ones you and your hate your life buddies like to describe? Here is a thought...lets keep the websites and get rid of negative thinking, ignorant, naysayers like you! Ahhhhh I feel so much better. Have a great weekend everyone!!!!
ReplyDelete