Julia said:
Like shiborigirl, I am continually frustrated with the long load times of the PT website (if it will even load at all). I get news online from other local sites. The PT would have to overhaul their website if they want to charge.
Chris Windsor said:
If the New York Times and Times of London were unable to successfully charge for website access, then who would possibly pay to read the P-T? TO paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, the P-T is no New York Times!
tr brown said:
I sometimes read the letters and comments of others in the Press Telegram, or maybe a local issue. But lately, 3 times out of 4, I flip the pages and wind up reading nothing. I don't know if its me losing interest or the paper not saying anything relevent to me.
Evan said:
LBPOST.com has better breaking news than the Press-Telegram anyways. I turn here before I turn to the Press-Telegram.
Frank Salcido, Carmel said:
Every morning I read, or try to read, the PT online. To be honest - it stinks. The reader poll seems to be written by grade schoolers. The Lifestyle section is the same every day for a week, sometimes longer. I agree, the pages take too long to load. I'm finding more and more, the same subject articles in the LBPost are frequently more in depth. Now, when reading the PT online, I'm done perusing the articles within two minutes, then look at the LBPost, the Long Beach Report, Wednesdays, the District Weekly, Thursdays, the Grunion Gazette. If the PT starts charging to read online, they have a hell of a lot of work to do on their site. And please, isn't it time to back-page Grobaty, his dog Jimmy, The Cop Across The Street, and the seemingly after-hours parties in The Barn.
Laurie Manny said:
Nobody is going to pay to read the news online, there are many online resources available for news, local and otherwise. Their real concern is monetization which will have to be earned through ads, online classifieds, etc.
On the plus side as more people gravitate away from the paper editions to the online version the overhead of all of the news sites drops dramatically.
Change is inevitable.
Art said:
I get the PT delivered daily. I enjoy reading the paper with my morning coffee. I don't like to read the paper on the internet other than a few headline stories on the LBPost. I would never pay to read a newspaper on the internet.
Bill Orton said:
The new journalistic business model should integrate ELEVATED online services for subscribers that allow someone paying for the daily paper to select either the full print edition OR a full edition available electronically. The current website pales against the print edition, as it does not include the blurbs, ads and other small items that really are what link things together. By allowing SUBSCRIBERS to gain a daily PDF of the full paper, plus unlimited access to archive searches, the publication would have the chance to trim its physical print run, leading to newsprint savings and shorter runs on the press. If the chain really wanted to add value to subscriptions, they'd make PDFs available of EVERY publication printed by LANG for the price of a subscription to any of the dailies, thus letting content from one region to help sell subscriptions elsewhere.
ShoutLongBeach.com said:
Why would anyone pay to read an online newspaper period when you can read get your news from hundreds of great online sources like the LBPost.com? On the flipside we know that publishing a good news website is not easy task. Hopefully local advertisers will realize that people want a free site and spend their money there.
shiborigirl said:
i for one, won't have a problem sticking to smaller local websites. on the rare occasions i visit the PT site (i get the LA Times delivered daily)i am continually frustrated with the way the pages load and the number of times i have to reload pages. PAY for it? i don't think so...i'm liking the LBPost more and more.
Charlie said:
Why would anyone want to pay to read that liberal paper?
|
Archives
