Survey: Would you pay for online news?

[Alistair1990]

I'm working on a research project about the monetisation of online news for my Journalism degree. I've made a quick survey about your online news viewing habits and your reactions to paying for online news.

Incase you weren't all aware, the Time and Sunday Times websites will be locked behind a pay wall from next month. We will have to pay £1 per day or £2 per week to view them.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GGHVHVZ

Thanks for your time, it will help me a lot.


Mods, feel free to move this if it's not in the relevant section.

[TheFlyingBanana]

Happy to answer your survey - absolutely not.

What possible incentive would there be to do so?

I will pay for specialist knowledge and resources I can't get elsewhere, but general news? Not a chance.

[Jasandjules]

No, I would not pay for on-line news - plenty of free (though somewhat biased) news available on the TV.

[Jinx]

If I won't pay for Pr0n on the net why would I pay for news?

[Spiritual_Beggar]

Q4; option 2

£0-£99 per week! I don't bloody think so .......bit of a typo there me thinks

[hornetrider]

No.

Next!

[Stu R]

done, just a heads up - you should probably make the final question multiple choice, as I'd guess lots of people (well, me ) use more than one news site/channel

[unpc]

Hell would be a giant skating rink before I would pay. Not a chance.

[Size Nine Elm]

The whole survey seems to be skewed into assuming anyone only ever gets their news from one source.
I get news from Radio, TV, PH (), various websites, and particularly specific links from other articles.
I would never assume I only ever went to one newspaper website...

[Puggit]

I love the Times website, and visit daily.

But f-k me, I won't be paying £1 per day for the privilege, as suggested - the news is everywhere else (like porn)

[CoopR]

Yea I thought the same Stu.

News is news and it will get reported by many people, websites or papers. Trying to force an old business model onto the internet just doesn't work, look at the music industry for example. Gone are the days of a newspaper full of a mixture of things from news to general interest to business in the same paper.

People will pay for specialist knowledge and analysis or specific editorial content. I'd pay for a lot more in depth news and commentary in certain areas but general stuff, no way.

[10JH]

I wouldn't pay for news, there is too much good free stuff out there.

Personally I use Google News, as I like the way it lays things out and how you can customise it. Then usually click through to my favourite sources to read the full article.

Even if all the newspapers put up paywalls, you could still get decent news from the BBC for free.

I'd recommend reading 'Free' by Chris Anderson, it's very interesting and goes into some detail about free vs paywalls.

[zac510]

Answered.

I happily pay £1 for a print newspaper so why not online?

[10JH]

Anyone know if the Times is blocking off all their old content? Would be a shame to lose access to all their archived stuff.

[Dave Angel]

Done.

I would never pay, too many other free options IMHO.

[Mazda Baiter]

No.

[zac510]

Puggit said:

I love the Times website, and visit daily.

But f-k me, I won't be paying £1 per day for the privilege, as suggested - the news is everywhere else (like porn)

There will be other pricing strategies and a lot more multimedia content in the future.

I don't work for them, just a reader.

[Parrot of Doom]

10JH said:

Anyone know if the Times is blocking off all their old content? Would be a shame to lose access to all their archived stuff.

Join your local library and (if its like Manchester) you can access their entire archive, way back to the 18th century.

[Strangely Brown]

Survey completed.

Answer is an emphatic no.

[Pints]

Survey completed. Rupert could kiss my arse on a daily basis and the answer would still be no.
I'm not exactly chuffed at having to pay the BBC to get my news, so why would I want to pay The Times and still have it littered with adverts?