I surf in to a lot of local papers around the US (not foreign ones, so far) that stop me cold with $ demands. I always think that they must have a strong paying community that wants to remain exclusive to their area, or they don't just want anyone from outside reading their news. Nevertheless, none are very good. The ADS has changed so much in the last 40 years it is just strange. Corporations may legally be people, but they don't get it.
I feel sorry for the newspaper delivery people who get up early and take us our papers. The Star will loose a lot of customers. Hence they loose icome. Don't care about the Star employees but only the delivery folks.
Hope the Star folks are reading this.
Thanks to the Arizona Daily Star customer service rep who just confirmed there was an across the board price increase on July 1, to cover the increased cost of ink and paper. Whatever. 23.2 percent is excessive. And the timing is questionable.
Too bad it takes a low-wage front line employee to do what the Publisher can't.
Poor Phil has signed on at KGUN.
"... failed to mention the two pieces of information most key to readers: how the hell much, and how to sign up."
Remember, Chase isn't a news guy (ya know, who, what, where, when, why, how), and I'm sure the one copy editor left out there was loathe to make even one change to the stellar copy provided to her/him.
And Chase has not backed off his assertion that the cost to subscribers would not go up with this change. I have statements to the contrary. To the tune of a 23 percent jump. Guess Chase wasn't a math major, either.
A non issue until there are 11 articles a month worth reading. ADS should have just put the UofA sports coverage behind the wall. It is the only content they have that is saleable.
"In some markets paywalls have worked. In others they haven't."
Gee, I WONDER how it will pay...errrrr play in Tucson...
They cut my comment! I did use a bad word. But only one. Oh well. Did not intend to but what the neck it's the Tucson Weekly.
Basically I will save my money and just go by the New York Times on Sunday and read it all week. (it will take that long) and catch up on the news. The only thing I used the Star for was the movie times and the obits and U of A Football coverage.
The articles had the smell of Progressive slime anyway.
My blood pressure is just fine. In fact since I retired from gov't service it has gone way down! lol
I'm also curious how many items you get to access before you have to pay? I don't subscribe and so far have been reading it the same as I always have. I wonder if the wire stories (that you can find elsewhere) count toward your monthly total? Still so many unanswered questions that I don't feel like searching for. The information should be front and center.
I will miss the wonderful mugshots -that's about it
So they expect me to pay $13 a month for rehashed stories from other news sources like the New York Times or the AP, with a smittering of local stories I could easily find at local TV news stations. That's not a good deal.
My canary just died. It refused to excrete its waste onto the Star. It HAD to let go, but didn't want to inflate the value of what showed up on the doorstep.
In the past few years, and at an increasing pace, the Star has become pretty useless. Breaking news and important information isn't posted to the site in a timely fashion, and in many cases, is never posted at all. A good deal of what is there is riddled with typos and grammar mistakes and is of no interest to me. And the mobile app...ugh. Click into it, and you get to stare at a Jim Click ad for a long time. When it finally disappears, more often than not you're treated to ilk. On Sundays, for instance, it's story after story of promotions and etc. of the fancy folk in town. Just...no. No way am I paying for more of the same. Especially when there are other ways to get the information that I actually want.
Now, if they began posting good information that's well written, I might pay for that. But for now...no.
So the Weekly, which has always been given away, will remain paywall-free? Pretty bold.
Fraser, please, stop being subtle, ok? You've been holding back and building up a head of steam, and that's bad for your blood pressure & various arteries, including those in your brain.....deep breaths, deep breaths.....
Can't wait for this week's column to take an in-depth look at the change from Starnet to Tucson.com -- please don't forget to mention the huge price spike the Star has just initiated.
And we're getting less for more. This morning's paper will barely cover the bottom of the bird cage.
Inquiring minds are waiting, John!
Shamrell...no chance. Over 40 and way too many bags under the eyes.
If they got Gina Trunzo as Sally's replacement, I'd watch...
ALWAYS liked Sally and we wish her well in herpursuits
You guys dumped Tim Vanderpool?? That's disapponting.
This equally sucks about what happened to Villareal, but that's a very difficult, ticky line. Talented, no doubt, but would there be any other positions for him to take up? (If the Star is hiring on JournalismJobs.com at the same time as dumping Villareal, thhat is very cruel.) It appears the AZDS dropped his beat. The fact he survived the loss of being the movie reviewer and was able to keep a role at the Star is admirable, but he also ended up a GA reporter in a risky position because of it.
Tucson Weekly |
3725 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 |
(520) 797-4384 |
Powered by Foundation