Online news subscriptions are fine, BUT
As I read yet another article on the New York Times’ website, I count the days until I am required to pay for content.
Unlike many stompy people out there who will never, ever read the New York Times again because they’re charging for the content (and not just paper that it’s printed on), I am fine with a subscription-based model.
Subscriptions will once again make the news organization beholden to subscribers and not just advertisers. They’ll keep talented, hard-working journalists on the payroll for another day. They’ll keep those journalists working on watchdog stories and not just click-friendly puff pieces on the Gosselins and the local bar scene.
Subscriptions. Let’s do this.
Here’s what I DO NOT want to see:
I do not want to hassle with ANYTHING that keeps me from viewing the subscription on two or more computers.
I do not want to be pressured into any upsell/cross-sell “opportunities” as newspaper subscribers often are.
I do NOT want ANYONE calling my house asking me to sign up for the subscription, EVER. Another annoying thing newspapers do.
I do not want the New York Times to send me endless, ceaseless invoices after we’ve canceled our subscription. If we cancel, deal with it. In fact it would be great if they found someone else to be in charge of subscriptions before they extend their aggressive ineptitude to a savvy online customer base.
I DO NOT want to see bills at all. Just bill me until I tell you to stop.
I DO NOT WANT any marketing communications. Don’t subscribe me to 800 e-mails that I now have to opt-out of.
Will you subscribe?
January 30th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
Completely agree with your list of things to not do. I’d be willing to pay for it, but I also think that I could live without. I also don’t want to see a price that rivals the printed/delivered copy and one that allows for some variety of sharing.
February 2nd, 2010 at 7:40 am
Yes! I especially agree with being able to view a subscription one more than one device. DRM and things like it are annoying crap and I hope newspapers don’t try to be as stupid as the music industry.
February 2nd, 2010 at 11:11 am
I’d be willing to pay for some decent editing. I just finished reading about “pedalers” in Ahwatukee.
February 9th, 2010 at 7:18 am
If I subscribe to either the print or the online version, I would like free access to archives further back than two weeks. It’s not unusual for me to have a conversation about something I read in the newspaper that I paid for a couple months back, but since I didn’t clip it I’m SOL unless I want to pay a separate, additional $2.95 or plow through the microfilm at the library.
It doesn’t have to be until the beginning of time, but maybe back a year or so.
February 9th, 2010 at 7:21 am
Oh, and yes to all of the upsell/phone call crap. We changed our number, and I specifically didn’t update it with the newspaper because of this.