Boston Globe drops paywall for Marathon coverage

[JRoyal]

Hurricane and disaster info, free.
True crime in the streets, pay the man.

How come stores don't give away free batteries during hurricanes? Or free flashlights. Or free food? The newspaper business lost its way long ago.

After a hurricane, survival information is vital.
You gonna shake down people in the streets? Sometimes they have nothing.

Sorry I think I misunderstood. You are all for making people pay for this crime stuff regarding the marathon. I can see your point about a natural disaster. I still sort of disagree but I can see your point.

With what happened last night, this is more than just "crime stuff." Bombs are going off. This is information the public needs. Plus, it helps get info out that could help catch the people responsible.

Again, sometimes journalism isn't just about money.

 

[BillyT]

Hurricane and disaster info, free.
True crime in the streets, pay the man.

How come stores don't give away free batteries during hurricanes? Or free flashlights. Or free food? The newspaper business lost its way long ago.

Because a store is not the heart and soul of a community. That is what a newspaper should be.

 

[Scott Carefoot]

Also, why should your Red Sox-Rays coverage be free because there was an unrelated incident in another part of town? Why should a feature about one of the victims be free? Why should exclusive video be free?

Give the people what they need. I can understand that level of compassion. But giving away the cow on the day when you can most easily sell it is a poor strategy, the type that brought us here.

It's not feasible to make some sections free and keep other sections behind a paywall on such short notice. Dropping the paywall altogether was probably something the technical team could do in 2-4 hours, if not less.

As for business strategy, the Boston Globe is far and away the best newspaper site in North America, and I'm not even talking about the content. It's a masterpiece of responsive design. Maybe they think that showcasing their site will encourage more people to sign up. I'm not suggesting that will actually work, but I can see the logic behind it.

 

[House M.D.]

I'm on the opposite side of the country with no reason to pay for the Globe. In this instance, when TV news is so pitiful and the Globe is more accurate, I'd pay for the Globe if asked.

 

[Freuchen Icepick]

good paywalls are porous. good internet anything is porous. pulling paywalls in developing public-wellware type scenarios, like hurricanes or crazy bombing and shootout miniseries events, is part of a sound porous philosophy. when the world is watching, it follows, you welcome them and let them see.

i see only downside to not pulling the paywall -- ill will, eroded trust and, perhaps worst, irrelevance. pulling the paywall, on the other hand, offers tremendous upside for the brand, its stature and relevance. if there was a pro-paywall camp at the globe yesterday my money is they're on the other side tomorrow.

 

[Versatile]

Giving away content for free has already driven many newspapers to irrelevance.

 

[Fredrick]

I'd love to hear some of the stories from people in the newsrooms in Boston. Certainly some reporters have been working around the clock. As we know overtime isn't allowed in many/(most?) shops.
In this day and age of no raises/furloughs/you better not work a second of overtime, I'd love to hear about atrocities in the newsroom regarding the coverage of the Boston bombings.
Are people being told to not work OT? Are any of the high paid managers and middle managers who seem to escape layoff after layoff actually doing some reporting work to help our the reporters who don't get overtime?
Or is everything fine and dandy in the Boston media centers?

 

[BillyT]

Fredrick:

Certainly some reporters have been working around the clock. As we know overtime isn't allowed in many/(most?) shops.

*****

Do you really think the Herald and Globe worried about this? Yeah, they have unions, but those unions are made of of journalists, and this is a crisis situation.

Legal or not, the paper's will find a way to make this up.

I am kind of surprised to find the amount of cynicism and pro-business mentality on this board.

These papers (and it was not just the Globe) do something to help the readers, and you whack it.

Reporters do their jobs, editors do their jobs, and you wonder about overtime.

This is just awful, especially in a situation like this.

 

[Versatile]

It was a legitimate journalism question asked on a journalism board. I have no idea how they are handling this, but in my experience, these all-hands-on-deck situations often mean so many are involved that no one person has to kill themselves. The smaller but similarly complicated stories more often put reporters in a bind because no one is helping them.

 

[Riptide]

I'm sure everyone in the Boston newsrooms came together in a pinch, instantly and impressively, and worked to exhaustion all week long. It's what we do. It's everything we prepare for.

Next week, of course, it's business as usual: "What have you done for us lately?"

 

[BillyT]

Versatile: Absolutely legit. I would love to hear some stories.

But assuming that "overtime isn't allowed" puts a spin on it that should not be there.

You do your job, and the bosses will make it right the next week.

I feel badly for all the people who assume negativity, but hey, I suppose all reporters need to be suspicious. (Honest comment).

 

[Versatile]

Versatile: Absolutely legit. I would love to hear some stories.

But assuming that "overtime isn't allowed" puts a spin on it that should not be there.

You do your job, and the bosses will make it right the next week.

I feel badly for all the people who assume negativity, but hey, I suppose all reporters need to be suspicious. (Honest comment).

Every journalist I know has worked unpaid overtime from time to time. Many have worked 15-plus unpaid hours in a single week. Management does not "make it right the next week" because the whole thing would go down the tubes if they tried. At a certain point, your entire staff is on a comp day and you can't put out a product.

 

[Captain Obvious]

Journalists work unpaid overtime because they are suckers.

 

[Riptide]

Journalists work unpaid overtime because they are suckers.

No. Because they are dedicated.

Bad managers can ruin that in the end.

 

[KJIM]

Every journalist I know has worked unpaid overtime from time to time.

Pretty much every person that I know, journalist or not, has worked unpaid overtime from time to time.

 

[wicked]

I have worked in some pretty crappy newsrooms where OT was approved in major news emergencies, without any hesitation -- in one case, a day after some folk had been laid off.

The Globe's union unit is still fairly strong. I think they'll be fine.

 

[Fredrick]

Versatile: Absolutely legit. I would love to hear some stories.

But assuming that "overtime isn't allowed" puts a spin on it that should not be there.

You do your job, and the bosses will make it right the next week.

I feel badly for all the people who assume negativity, but hey, I suppose all reporters need to be suspicious. (Honest comment).

I do not assume the worst about reporters. I love reporters. They'd work 90 hours in one work week around the clock on this story. I do assume the worst about managers/editors, whatever you want to call them. In this age where furloughs are accepted as standard operating procedure, where job reviews are given but raises are not given, yes I am cynical about those in charge during a crisis such as the one in Boston. Again, bless those reporters. I know damn well THEY would work 20 hours a day for 7 days on this story. The managers? In this day and age I find them to be do-nothing think tankers. Would love to be proven wrong.

 

[BillyT]

Globe paywall goes back up tomorrow.

Unsure on NYT and WSJ, because I have not looked yet.