Paywalls seem to the norm

[Easto]

I read something the other day that a lot of Podcasts are going with subscriptions. I just noticed the Washington Post was advertising $29 for the first year and then $100 a year thereafter. How long will it be before any relevant content is going to cost us no matter what?

[Philip]

In my view the truth is somewhere in the middle.. I understand (first hand) that content developers/providers have to eat in order to exist. Still, paywalls will reduce their readership. The middle ground is to offer multiple options for users, have a free service that is ad-supported with some limitations, then offer an optional paid subscription for people that don't want the ads and want premium content.

[Humboldt]

Never enjoyed podcasts myself.

If I'm driving I want to listen to music.

If I'm working, no podcasts would work and the only music I can work to is Pink Floyd.

Anything else, even if I love it, is too distracting.

Money for content I get, but it's an interesting one.

I understand news sites need money to produce stories, text or audio, but am always kind of pissed when I click on a news report that requires me to buy a script before I can read it.

If you're on Google News, why d*ck around with scripts requiring membership?

[twwabw]

I don't patronize pay sites- period. I notice some of the most expensive are not necessarily the best. My niece is an editor at a Texas company that is wildly successful, by being free. 100% free. And they keep growing and growing. I find their whole story fascinating, as they an exact opposites to the trend. Advertisers pay for the process, and they flock to the paper to be part of it. Check them out- https://communityimpact.com/corporate-about/

[Easto]

^^ I totally agree. If you give the people what they want they'll be there, then just rake in the advertiser bucks.