Free Lunch Not Free: When Online Papers Ask 'ASL?'
	found on: Online Journalism Review written by infernalpress, edited by Peter (Plastic) [ read unedited ] posted Tue 16 Jul 8:58pm
		"The debate in the industry continues to rage as far as paid content vs. registration. As an organization, we don't believe there's a substantial opportunity to charge for our content online, but we do believe it's reasonable to expect users to provide some information to access this valued content. We want a way to monetize that database information, and we plan to be pretty aggressive about it." - Eric Christensen, vice president and general manager of Belo Interactive. infernalpress writes "No, it's not just you: the number of newspapers requiring registration is increasing. OJR takes a look at a selection of the growing number of newspapers that now require free registration - and why they won't be abandoning that policy anytime soon. Their sample includes Latimes.com and everybody's favorite bugbear: the New York Times. The OJR also examines the implications for weblogs, community news sites and discussion boards. The story is fairly in-depth with numerous interviews, citing what each paper wants out of the registration and what they've learned about their readers. The article also notes that any loss in readers was quickly recouped after a breaking news story, suggesting that forcing registration on your readers does not necessarily have a long-term impact on the number of visitors. A related story explains how some sites are actually turning a profit; unsurprisingly, it's mostly by building corporate web sites."

[ more plastic... ]    

show almost all: 31 commentsbest: 8 comments by oldest first (ignore threads) newest first highest scores first oldest first newest first (ignore threads)

1.  Login: so, Password: what   by YCDK       at Tue 16 Jul 9:27pm score of 3 astute     I don't know what the big deal is. It's no worse than how you have to bring a driver's license, birth certificate, and a major credit card to the library before they'll let you read their copy of the newspaper. Oh, wait. The can knows who to whoop.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

10.  *sigh*   by veschke       at Wed 17 Jul 5:12am score of 0.5 modappeal   in reply to comment 1     Some moderator appears to have missed the point. Cynicism is the opposite of wisdom.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

2.  False Information   by hojita       at Tue 16 Jul 10:32pm score of 2 helpful     Maybe it's just me, but I am extremely hesitant to give out any sort of personal information to any site on the web, especially when it is just going to be used to target me with ads that I'm not interested in and will not buy anything from. With the Random NY Times Registration Generator (which seems down at the moment, but the Google cache works just fine), I suspect that for every online service that requires registration for content, someone will just create a quick script to falsify a whole lot of random information and register for you. I certainly will continue to do this. Everyone is happy here. I get access to content, and the site gets some information that they can pretend to do something with so their advertisers are happy. On the other hand, I realise that maybe I'm simply part of the problem. I'm technically "stealing" their content, because the information I'm "paying" with is phony. Though, I'm really only cheating the people that the original site sells the information to. The original site still gets money from advertisements, but the the advertisers simply don't get any money from me. Of course, when you block all ad images (Yeah, Mozilla and lynx) and don't get any spam, it's not like advertisers are reaching you anyway, targeted ads or no.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

25.  Re: False Information   by shadow27       at Wed 17 Jul 9:31am score of 1   in reply to comment 2     Are you telling me you're not a horny 18 y/o blonde cheerleader! I feel used... Kickintheeye.com   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

3.  Fair trade?   by mrjeff3000       at Tue 16 Jul 10:46pm score of 2 astute     The information available on newspapers' websites has value to me. My demographic information has value to the newspapers. I consider it a pretty good trade, so far. I get New York Times and Los Angeles Times articles without having to pay money to read them (although the LA Times may join the Wall Street Journal and charge a subscription) and the NYT and LAT get to learn a little bit about me. A dedicated snoop could learn way more about who I really am by looking at my accumulated Plastic posts than by connecting my NY Times browsing history with my rather generic (and possibly untrue) NYT member profile.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

12.  Paranoia Big Destroya   by HerbieTheElf       at Wed 17 Jul 6:10am score of 1   in reply to comment 3     Ditto here. I think it's a pretty decent trade as well. I'm happy to hand over some personal information rather than $20/month, seeing how I have trouble believing my personal information is worth $20 total... and that's for all time. I simply don't understand the paranoia of people suggesting this is an unfair deal to receive some relatively reliable, pseudo-free information. Do most of us really think the New World Order - who, of course, is behind the New York Times - is really saving that information so they can come and shoot us down or mess with our lives like we're in some low-grade Sandra Bullock movie? Sorry, but my time is too valueable - and my personal value of too little value - to worry about crap like that. I also don't worry about the black helicopters that scan my house for money and weapons... "You never ask questions when God's on your side." -- Bob Dylan   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   19.  Here's a way of helping them even more   by Miguel Agullo       at Wed 17 Jul 6:46am score of 1   in reply to comment 3     My demographic information has value to the newspapers. So that they can convince advertisers to place ads on their pages. Thus, by assuring them you're a 18-year old married female with a MBA, 250,000$ annual compensation, 4 children and in charge of all your households purchases, you're setting yourself up for more full-color-special-features-in-depth reports that you could ever dream of reading.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   31.  Re: Fair trade?   by billmcn       at Wed 17 Jul 10:16am score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 3     This is a fair trade up to a point. I'm willing to give out demographic information like zip code, income, education level, but I still lie about my name and email. Being a data point in somebody's computer is okay, but spam is intolerable.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

4.  Use your illusions.   by Peter Murphy       at Tue 16 Jul 10:49pm score of 1.5     Christensen and company clearly value the demographics obtained from registration. It helps them get money from advertising agencies - which in turn helps acquire money from the ad company customers. I don't blame them one bit - if Madison Avenue cash is all that keeps the content free, then good for them. What isn't clear to me is whether Christensen is truly being honest with his clients. His registration information can be divided into three groups: (a) Totally bogus - people signing up with temporary hotmail accounts, and the like. (b) Legitimate, but outside of the target range of his clients. Almost all web ads I encounter are targeted to the US - and thus wasted on a Brisvegan like me. (c) Valid advertising targets. The marks. The marketers want (c) and at the moment they have them. But the Internet is international - and there may come a stage when most people who read (say) The New York Times don't live in New York - or even the United States. Christensen's job would be to pretend that (b) doesn't happen - or possibly classify it as "emerging markets". He doesn't want to dramatise how much of the ad company revenue is being wasted on sheep herders in Alma-Ata and the like. And as for (a) - he would be best to ignore it altogether. It's small now, but not later. It was a stroke of genius when someone invented the NYT Random Login Generator. Now you don't have to register at all - this bit of java-script does it for you. On my computer, it's poised to pretend I'm a health professional from Cyprus, and will even make up a bogus email address for me. I foresee equivalents springing up for other "registration-only" sites such as the LATimes.com. You can download the script and tailor it for your own use. (Hint, hint, Carl?) What if this sort of thing becomes common - say 5% or 10% of the demographic data? What will Christensen and like tell their clients? I assume nothing - it's not in Christensen's interest to dramatize this. But then, advertising always seems to be run on make-believe, so it's just par for the course, or so it seems to me.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

13.  Re: Use your illusions.   by Petronius       at Wed 17 Jul 6:22am score of 1   in reply to comment 4     All mass market data is just that-mass. Everybody hopes for perfect targetting, getting the message only to those likely to be interested in it. Such perfection has yet to be invented, and your first two categories show the problems. However, they are problems only for a time. For example, you say that as a "Brisvegan" you are outside the scope of the Times' clients. (by the way, just what is a Brisvegan--an English beaneater?)Then you find new clients. Maybe the new UK release of tasty soyburgers would interest you. Now we gotcha. If sheepherders in Alma-Ata become a significant audience, they will sell ads to Tashkent merchants for the new digital-ready sheperd's crooks. Or American firms will discover the untapped audience for electronic anti-wolf devices and open a new market. No man is an island. We are all marks, for something. What rescues us from insignificance is the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. Carl Sagan   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   23.  Re: Use your illusions.   by peanutfish       at Wed 17 Jul 8:28am score of 1.5 informative   in reply to comment 13     (by the way, just what is a Brisvegan--an English beaneater?) from Brisbane, Australia (city nick = BrisVegas) Some mistakes are too much fun to make only once.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

5.  effect on weblogs/community sites - workaround   by mlang       at Tue 16 Jul 11:06pm score of 5 informative     registration also throws up roadblocks for weblogs, community news sites, discussion boards and e-mail newsletters that point to news articles. (ojr piece) i recommend the following when posting new york times or wall street journal articles (haven't tried it with the other pubs) to weblogs/community sites: when viewing the article you want to link, click on the 'email this article' button in the upper right hand corner of the page and email the article it to yourself. doing that (or sending it to your mother or to my mother, for that matter) generates a link which can then be followed by anyone, whether logged in or not, to view the content. yes, this means you still need to have registered (otherwise you wouldn't be seeing the content at all), but readers of your weblog or members of your online community who want to read the article (and hopefully get as riled up as your are and start a grassroots movement to do whatever it is you want to do) can now do so without the burden of registration. i don't know when the email-generated links expire, if ever. i posted one (to a different community site) more than four months ago and it's still active, so we can safely deduce that they last a good long time. an example:   original link; registration required   new, improved link; copied and pasted from an email sent to myself surely this is ultimately more user-friendly than forcing people through bots or crash-prone websites serving mysterious scripts they don't really understand.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

6.  Back to the real world...   by DNA       at Wed 17 Jul 12:59am score of 1     Ok, fact is, many (probably most) people do NOT fill in their real information on these online registration forms. Some (like me) just fill these fields at random. Some take advantage of online registration forms to practice some imagination and creativity. Online forms are your only opportunity to become whatever you want, whether an Astronaut or the Queen of England. You can also have an instant sex change operation and get the salary you've always wanted. So the statistical value of the demographical data collected is zero and should not be taken seriously in any scientific research, or at least take into account a very high margin of error.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

7.  Re: Back to the real world...   by zhwj0119       at Wed 17 Jul 1:20am score of 1.5 informative   in reply to comment 6     It seems that this is only half of the demographic information they collect. Even if you are an astronaut with a sex change operation, they still will be able to tell that you read all of the stories about fishing and college fraternity scandals. THEN the "surround ads" and other custom-tailored floating windows for fish finders and DLK pins can be served up. These articles don't really seem to emphasize this aspect, but rather leap from "registration" to "content tailoring". Somehow Belo figured out that out-of-Texas viewers want to read about the Cowboys, but apparently we draw our own conclusions about how that was done. zh--- If I had known it was harmless, I would have killed it myself. --A Scanner Darkly, Philip K. Dick   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   24.  Re: Back to the real world...   by wuulf       at Wed 17 Jul 9:28am score of 1   in reply to comment 7     ...they still will be able to tell that you read all of the stories about fishing and college fraternity scandals. THEN the "surround ads" and other custom-tailored floating windows for fish finders and DLK pins can be served up.   That's not truly the biggest problem, I believe. History tells us that advertising is going to be rampant in this new medium because it has been in most every other medium, the major issue here is whether I want to provide my name and address to anyone - including advertisers! So you see, in that respect, making up information for these fields is protecting a person's personal information (to a certain extent).   Putting false information in these fields is a very simple way to combat intrusive advertising. Did you see the movie "Minority Report"? The advertising was so intrusive as to repeat to you, out loud and in front of the store, what you bought on your last visit! What if you bought Vagisil, and a black, lacy teddy? That is intrusive advertising and part of the battle to keep things like that from happening is going to be fought on the internet and technology fronts by people like us. -- Never argue with an idiot. He'll only drag you down to his level, and beat you to death with experience --   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

8.  Let them eat fake   by snarkism       at Wed 17 Jul 1:45am score of 1.5 brilliant     Oh well, I'm not about to register for anymore news websites. The ones I have already registered for have ridiculously fake information. The problem is, they just aren't very useful. Most online news services suck - they don't provide much information worth registering for, let alone paying. If they increased the standard of their service, then I might be interested. An example is the way many of them have almost no photographs or pictures. It's insane. They vaguely describe something that would be easier done with a simple picture (which tells a thousand words). So I think the effect of this will only be to dwindle their userbase and drive more traffic to independent, non-registration sites. this will only get worse as internet community concern over privacy increases. There was once a time when I would trust websites with my real information. Bullshit companies like Double-click put an end to that really quickly. I really would not mind using my real information if I could trust sites with it. Unfortunately, as proven again and again, I can't. Most web content isn't even worth the time it takes to register. snarkism That's using your ass.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

9.  I have only registered at three online newspapers   by MAYORBOB       at Wed 17 Jul 3:29am score of 1 helpful     The NY Times, the LA Times, and the Wall Street Journal. Beyond that, I can't really think of a reason to register for any others. All too often the stories that might get published at one paper that requires registration end up being syndicated and published at another that doesn't require registration. Obviously, from my track record of finding stories to share at plastic, my ability to find stories hasn't been hampered. And I haven't noticed receiving a higher volume of spam since I registered. Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

11.  viva spamgourmet   by somebaudy       at Wed 17 Jul 6:06am score of 1.5 informative     When registering, with these web sites I tend to create spamgourmet addresses when registering . I get my passwords and... nothing after that. I can even check the little box that says please allow us to add your info in the database we sell to advertisers so that we can make a dime on the web (or something like that. Right now, there's more than 300 mails that have not reach my mailbox. And that number keeps growing. [sig]"insert something witty here"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

14.  How is this information useful ?   by dewdrops       at Wed 17 Jul 6:23am score of 1.5 funny     I'm always amazed that they're able to sell the information they receive in their forms, as so many people (like me) fill in junk ("asdfadsf" is almost always already a registered username when I sign up). Their information must be at least 60% noise, if not more. Who actually pays for these databases and what use could they possibly have for them ? cheers, adsflkj adsflkj 39 ffj st. efilj, ak 02143 (455)555-55555 asdfasdf@yahoo.com   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

15.  Interesting dichotomy.   by DeaconDoWrong       at Wed 17 Jul 6:30am score of 2.5 intriguing     I'm not saying anything one way or another, but I find it... ironic, let's say, that everyone is trying to access these websites, whose sole purpose is to provide information, while simultaneously denying them any information at all. So it's their obligation to provide you with all the accurate information they can provide for free; whereas as you insist on providing them with either willfully inaccurate information or nothing. And to some, the very idea that they would even ask is an affront.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

16.  Skewing the demographics   by zyxwvutsr       at Wed 17 Jul 6:34am score of 2.5 witty     They've really got to be wondering about this insatiable news-junkie with the login: Plastic and the password: Plastic. He seems to be everywhere, often reading the same story dozens of times a day.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

17.  Registration versus Paid Subscription   by mischief       at Wed 17 Jul 6:39am score of 2 astute     With registration for otherwise free content, the user takes the time to provide some information and the server drops a cookie on your computer. Then they note where that cookie is used regardless of the initial information provided. With a paid subscription, the content provider is interested in only one vital piece of personal data for which registration does not ask: your credit card number. I know which option I prefer. "And then... and then... and then...", and then the man who stuttered died, his last words an echo of his life   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

18.  Canadians only?   by Anonymous Idiot       at Wed 17 Jul 6:46am score of 0.5 informative     Just thought this might amuse some Americans. It came up in a conversation and more than a few of my Canadian friends do it. (I wonder if it's international?) Most sites want your address, zip code, etc., and most of them are at least smart enough to correlate the city and zip code. But as foreigners, there is of course only one zip code we know: Beverly Hills, 90210.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

20.  Americans too (Was: Canadians only?)   by faceplant       at Wed 17 Jul 7:00am score of 1   in reply to comment 18     90210 is the zip I like to give out at the cash registers of stores that insist I give them my zip code before they ring up my purchases. I don't blame the poor cashier, I just tell them I live with Brenda. The cookie stand is not part of the foodcourt. My Heart is a Flower   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   30.  Re: Americans too (Was: Canadians only?)   by stet       at Wed 17 Jul 10:05am score of 1   in reply to comment 20     I always give 'em the zip code 90805, which, according to the sound track for Ghost Dog is the zip code for Compton, CA. I like to think of it as striking a blow for diversity. Oh yeah, I tried to register for my own NYT account, but I couldn't get the damn page to work so I ended up using the bogus regs that float around 'blogs. "All of the juice had been sucked out/ Before Mel Bay taught us children to play"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   35.  Re: Canadians only?   by Erik Riker-Coleman       at Fri 19 Jul 11:54pm score of 1   in reply to comment 18     It's international all right. "Robert Bitchin" of Beverly Hills, CA has been a major media consumer in the US for the past couple years. stand up, keep fighting.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

21.  I can't understand...   by choodak       at Wed 17 Jul 7:03am score of 1.5 astute     why is it that people have a problem with these register to use sites. I've set up a junk-e-mail box and use that to register for sites. The rest of the info is made up. Every once in a while I go into that mailbox and delete everything in it. This way I can use the same password to access the sites yet not have to deal with their spam.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

27.  Other benefits   by shadow27       at Wed 17 Jul 9:42am score of 1.5 informative     My paper (registrantion required HAHA) just switched to requiring a login. While the aggregate statistical info is nice there's a side bonus. By requiring a person to login papers cut down on crap hits/page views. The amount of traffic to the site has dropped but the traffic there is is much more relevant. So even if the surfers personal info is faked papers are still able to track information readers genuinely want to see. This helps with both editorial work - writing stories people want to read - and in marketing - giving our advertisers REAL numbers. Another benefit to more focused traffic is that you're not paying to use bandwidth for pages someone doesn't want to read. Kickintheeye.com   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

28.  You are the product   by Zi       at Wed 17 Jul 9:59am score of 2.5 compelling     Most people don't understand thier relationship to the media. 1. You are the product - You may think that a newpaper or TV station is there to provide you with information, but you are wrong. TV shows, news stories, etc. exist to capture you, so your attention can then be sold to an advertiser. 2. The media market is two sided - Think of media as having two divisions, "Procurement" and "Revenue."       Procurement would be creating shows, news stories, whatever to attract you like a bee to a flower. Once they have you, you become an asset and are then sold to advertisers.       Revenue is the real media market, where you - the product - are then sold to the advertisers. Obviously, the more that is known about you and your proclivities, the more valuable a product you become. So, the baseline concept is: Information is an asset. Your information is your asset. If you trade that for a service, are you getting a good deal? So it goes. - Kurt Vonnegut   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

33.  Re: You are the product   by NIQ       at Wed 17 Jul 1:37pm score of 1   in reply to comment 28     Dude, you have made the most intelligent comment among all the postings. But based on the postings, most of the people think that it is a god-given right to freely peruse without paying. And this is why the media companies are cutting off funding for overseas news as this is information that most americans have less interest in this area. Ultimately, the media companies will be forced to dumn down information because the free-riders keep costing them money. Ultimately we will pay the price. more musings at www.quikscape.com   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

29.  Just like those stupid cards at the grocery store   by fnbrown       at Wed 17 Jul 10:04am score of 1     Nothing in my experience as a consumer of goods irks me more than having to use a grocery store membership card just to keep from being charged $3 extra for a dozen eggs. Under the false premise of providing savings, these cards enable corporate grocers to collect all manner of data on your spending habits. Personally, I don't think it's anybody's business, and I make it a habit to seek out grocery stores that do not require a membership card in order to get a fair price. I'm all for providing false information for these if there is no compelling alternative. I've filled out applications with names like "Phil McKracken" and "Ben Dover," and I'd do the same thing for an online newspaper. Currently, I just don't bother with the NY Times because of their policy. The Washington Post, and several other reputable publications still provide unfettered access to current events, and that's where I'll go to read the news. Romans 10:9-10   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]