After years of hype, 'e-newspapers' are getting closer to reality. Can they save a shrinking industry?
Comment: SURE THEY CAN HERE IS AN EXAMPLE INSTEAD OF READING OF IKE LISTEN TO TEXAS POLICE AND FIRE LIVE AS THE ACTION HAPPENS
http://www.transitguru.com/TEXASPOLICEANDFIRE.html
Comment: Even though I am a s/w gook, I still feel paper based newspaper is better to keep alive in the long run. Reading every information in front of laptop is not good for eyes nor does the attention span as much as it would be if we have a paper based newspaper to read.
Comment: am sorry for anything that this has to offer since this is how i make my living is delivering newspapers to businesses and to the boxes they do this i might as well live in a carboard box unless the decide they want to so away with those to
Comment: Several years ago I dropped the NYT plus a local paper in favor of reading them online. The sheer tonnage of wasted paper troubled me too much in the electronic age. The NYT offered a $49.95 annual subscription for access to all the articles and archives, a very fair deal. Then they dropped the subscription plan and gave it all away at no charge. I asked a friend who is an executive at the NYT why, especially when I would have been willing to pay even somewhat more for it if asked, and he replied that after much internal debate they had decided they did better with ads than with subscriptions. Online income I don't believe is anywhere near that of the paper. I get the impression that industry insiders know that while print ads are the money maker, the paper edition will be obsolete within a generation. Young people simply don't read them. I'm 64 and even I don't read physical newsprint anymore. Truly uncharted waters for the industry.
Comment: Oh... and apostrophes seem to be working OK for me... but you'd better not quote me on that... at least not here :)
Comment: I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. MCquivey's assessment. Once consumers have tasted free information, it will be next to impossible for the news industry to force-feed the notion of paying once more. Another point is that the millions of people who read the news on the Web are not doing so merely because it's free. They do so because of the other inherent benefits: searchability, absolute control by the reader of what is consumed, and when and where (for the most part). And it won't be any easier to wean traditional newspaper readers away from newsprint and toward an e-reader. A practical e-reader would have been a great idea in 1985. I don't believe it will gain any traction as a newspaper replacement.
Comment: Of course, the marketplace will decide, over time, to what extent e-newspapers displace paper newspapers. But, I personally hope that paper newspapers will remain available. I like to go for a walk, stop by a downtown drug store, buy a few snacks and the day's newpaper, then walk home. I like to have something tangible from which I can enjoy reading the day's news in my home, the feel of the paper as I turn the pages (in spite of the need to wash the ink off of my hands when I've finished the paper).
Comment: Also, it's 2008 and NEWSWEEKS website still isn't able to accept quotation marks or apostrophes in the comments? Seriously, time to find a new webmaster who knows what they're doing....pathetic.
Comment: I have no use at all for eBooks or ePapers. Electronic readers will never interest me; I just like curling up with a good book too much, and enjoy flipping the pages to look back on a statement or fact. To me they are a solution looking for a problem to solve and not finding one.
Comment: ???For a primitive look at how e-newspapers might work, consider the Kindle. Amazon currently offers 24 newspapers for use on the device. Subscribers pay $5.99 to $14.99 per month???
How is this supposed to workout in the long term versus people paying NOTHING to just read the same information via online news websites? Newspapers are simply doomed to fail no matter what. Even if these tablet???esq devices take off, news outlets who offer better & more efficient information websites FOR FREE will always be greater than monthly fees from the various paper outlets.
???the Kindle currently sells for $359???
This would be the 2nd point of anticipated failure, High startup cost and recurring monthly fee???s for what can only be described as a sub par reading experience that is devoid of color.
They need to incorporate color screens for pictures related to the articles in question and navigating the device/articles needs to be hassle free versus a test of patience. It???s not that it???s a bad idea, but they???re trying to push something to market without the acceptable pieces of technology needed to really make a noticeable amount of actual sales from the prospective of initial price point and functional utility compared to the various forms of web driven news competitors.
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
STRATEGIES Isn't it ironic: Xerox is hoping it can profit by teaching companies how to reduce their printing.
Sponsored by
|
Loading Menu
