Re:Won’t Subscribe
by helsinkiandrew on Monday September 28, 2020 @06:19AM
(#24615057)
> Then what was the whole point of going online (broadly speaking), if not to decrease delivery cost of articles?
To chase the audience that had gone online. The newspapers were loosing customers to other sites that could produce articles cheaply themselves or republish newswire stories or rely on content from users and didn't have the overhead of a traditional newspaper
Re:Won’t Subscribe
by ricardobeat on Monday September 28, 2020 @06:50PM
(#24622077)
> didn't have the overhead of a traditional newspaper
Hm. So you are saying going online decreases costs? Can't have it both ways...
Re:Won’t Subscribe
by helsinkiandrew on Monday September 28, 2020 @11:30PM
(#24623941)
No I’m saying people aren’t buying print newspapers. There’s 30% less than in 2000 and the revenue of the remaining has dropped off a cliff.
The surviving papers have moved online to find new customers and some have got rid of print version altogether.
Re:Won’t Subscribe
by junius2020 on Monday September 28, 2020 @06:21AM
(#24615071)
Why would I read online news when I can just have information streamed directly into my consciousness with a brain implant?
Why would I read the newspaper that comes in a few weeks when I can get instant information online?
Why would I wait for the town crier to come through in a few days when I can get instant information from this "news-paper"
Why would I wait until Sunday afternoon at the cathedral to get the town news when we're all assembled together in the middle ages when the town crier is coming past later this week?
That's quite amazing. Then what was the whole point of going online (broadly speaking), if not to decrease delivery cost of articles?