Freep, News Price

[65memories]

Did I miss an announcement about another Detroit Free Press and Detroit News price increase? $2.50 for Saturday and $3.00 for Sunday. I Enjoy reading the actual paper but not at those prices. No wonder print media is dead. They've lost another faithful reader to the internet.

[hhockey]

I stopped buying the daily editions when they went to $1.50. Now i am not buying the Sunday paper anyomre after it went to $3.00. Besides the Sunday Edition usually has repeat stories from Fridays Freep.com.

[Maof]

I pay $10/month for Thurs., Fri., Sunday delivery. They've tried several times to charge me $20 something. I called them and told them to cancel and they offered me the $10./month......until next time.

[Zads07]

Did I miss an announcement about another Detroit Free Press and Detroit News price increase? $2.50 for Saturday and $3.00 for Sunday. I Enjoy reading the actual paper but not at those prices. No wonder print media is dead. They've lost another faithful reader to the internet.

Because you refuse to pay $3.00 is why print media is dying. It's not dead.

We need your investment to put out the stories that need to be told. Journalism is not free.

[Bigb23]

Well - I'll pay the 3 bucks for the Sunday paper, if it's leather bound.

[poobert]

Because you refuse to pay $3.00 is why print media is dying. It's not dead.

We need your investment to put out the stories that need to be told. Journalism is not free.

Yeah but it should be a decent product. The Freep has been terrible for almost 20 years.

I subscribe to the NYT and the Ann Arbor News, but when I lived in the Detroit I actually dropped the Freep subscription because it was unreadable. One day the entire international section was a single article about Michael Jackson [[ripped from the AP, of course). Unacceptable.

New York Times subscriptions are up, and they offer at least quality reporting and writing.

[Uncledave54]

........
Journalism is not free.

No, journalism is not free. I will happily pay for it, however, what we are getting from both of our 2 formally fine news sourses, is not journalism.
Imho

[Atticus]

No, journalism is not free. I will happily pay for it, however, what we are getting from both of our 2 formally fine news sourses, is not journalism.
Imho

Agreed. I subscribe to Crains. Even though it is a business journal, I get better journalistic coverage of the region from them in pretty much every relevant subject matter. Most of the articles written in the Freep/DetNews are click drawing material, and not informative from all sides.

A regular classic example of poor Freep/DetNews “journalism” is they will often write a story about a pending lawsuit, and provide a bunch of comments from one side that may or may not be sensationalized. Then they will throw in a quick one liner of, “we reached out to [[the other side), and the other side responded they can’t/don’t/won’t comment on pending litigation.”

That is lazy journalism. When it is in the defense’s legal best interest to not comment [[which is regularly the case), the journalist should take the time to contact other subject matter experts and present the story from the defense’s likely perspective, even if the defense themselves can’t comment. But the journalist these days are lazy, and think they have checked their fair and balanced box by providing the “no comment from other side” line.

I will pay for journalism that covers all sides, particularly the side I don’t agree with... because I want to understand their perspective.

[jcole]

NYT is $5 for Sunday in NY and Chicago Trib is $4 for Sunday in Chi.
Count your blessings

[Jimaz]

... Besides the Sunday Edition usually has repeat stories from Fridays Freep.com.

I recently read a story in the Free Press hardcopy that said something like "Read more about ... here, and more about ... here, and more about ... here...."

It took me a moment to realize that by "here" they didn't mean this paper edition. They had simply pasted the hyperlinks into the hardcopy without translating their URLs for the reader.

LOL! I'm not making that up.

[Zads07]

Yeah but it should be a decent product. The Freep has been terrible for almost 20 years.

I subscribe to the NYT and the Ann Arbor News, but when I lived in the Detroit I actually dropped the Freep subscription because it was unreadable. One day the entire international section was a single article about Michael Jackson [[ripped from the AP, of course). Unacceptable.

New York Times subscriptions are up, and they offer at least quality reporting and writing.

You do understand that newspapers, most at least, have a subscription with the Associated Press, so newspapers will run AP stories a lot. Mine does.

Also, we can disagree on whether or not it's a good or a bad product, but what makes it bad, really?

Because although I will defend newspapers until my dying day, I want to know what it would take for readers to pay for content. What makes a newspaper a good product or a bad product?

[Meddle]

I remember when the Sunday editions were something like 2 inches thick and the price was $1.50 or so, maybe less. It took you the whole day to read through it. The Classifieds alone were many pages. Sometimes 10 pages of more of Help Wanteds. Then there were the autos for sale.


You could get more than enough coupons to make that cost back, sometimes a few times over.

[SyGolden48236]

Because although I will defend newspapers until my dying day, I want to know what it would take for readers to pay for content. What makes a newspaper a good product or a bad product?

A good start to putting out a good product would be actual spelling and grammar checking, and I do not mean merely hitting F7 on the keyboard. Does anyone proofread anymore?

I read both papers, almost cover to cover, every day and every day I see countless grammar and spelling errors that a fourth grader would know not to make.

I also read stories that are not at all cohesive. Also, I often see quotes from people who are not identified in the article, such as "... and Johnson said ...." But nowhere beforehand does the article identify who "Johnson" is.

Reporters today have gotten very lazy and that does not apply strictly to print media.

[Zads07]

A good start to putting out a good product would be actual spelling and grammar checking, and I do not mean merely hitting F7 on the keyboard. Does anyone proofread anymore?

I read both papers, almost cover to cover, every day and every day I see countless grammar and spelling errors that a fourth grader would know not to make.

I also read stories that are not at all cohesive. Also, I often see quotes from people who are not identified in the article, such as "... and Johnson said ...." But nowhere beforehand does the article identify who "Johnson" is.

Reporters today have gotten very lazy and that does not apply strictly to print media.

It's not reporters, it's the lack of copy editors. Those jobs have been slashed by the hundreds over the course of the past 10 year.

Yes, we reporters make mistakes. We are human and it's normal. But the workload we have now is insane. That's not to excuse the mistakes, because we don't like making them, but you have to understand that there are less of us now to catch those mistakes.

It's not lazy, it's overworked.

But I get what you are saying.

Investing in papers means the ability to hire more and to lessen the workload.

[Meddle]

I want to know what it would take for readers to pay for content.

I don't consider that I've ever paid for the news content. I consider news to be a public service, supported by advertisers. I paid for the convenience of home delivery. Remember, everything in a printed newspaper happened yesterday. At least with TV news, I could find out about things that happened today, then read about them in more detail tomorrow.

But notice, I said 'more detail'. That was when there were real reporters who went to incident scenes and gathered information first hand by talking to witnesses and officials. If you read three different papers [[which there were back then), you got details in three different ways because the reporters wrote their own stories. They didn't copy and paste off a link they clicked.

Today, I can hit five or more different 'news' websites and read exactly the same story, word for word, mistake for mistake.


I will NEVER pay for content on any website. I will never subscribe to any site that throws up a paywall.

[wazootyman]

I subscribe to the Sunday edition for a few reasons:

• I like to read a physical paper on the weekend [[I wouldn't have or take the time during the week). It gets me away from a screen.
• I believe in supporting local journalism. Is the paper as good as it once was? I don't think so. But I understand the reality of the situation; without funding, it can't exist. I know that the reasons for the decline are complicated. But I also know that if nobody pays for the paper, it's only going to get worse.
• The weekly cost of offset by, of all things, the coupons I clip. I get some sense of satisfaction showing up to my locally-owned grocer and using coupons I clipped.

I'm in my late 30's, and probably not the norm. But to think of a future where everyone gets their news from social media and TMZ...well, it scares the hell out of me.

I also subscribe to Crain's - which is a great paper, and well worth the annual fee.

[bust]

I am happy to pay for content that is worth it to me, and I do. I pay for content that is worth it two ways: worth my money and worth my time.

The Guardian is a recent success story. The just announced their first operating profit since 1988.

Guardian Media Group announces outcome of three year turnaround strategy
https://www.theguardian.com/gnm-pres...round-strategy

Detroit's newspapers should pay attention to how did they did it.

How Tribune Publishing, The Guardian, and Slate tackled reader revenue by valuing their journalism more
Exclusive podcasts, tightened paywalls, and just plain asking each played a part.
https://www.niemanlab.org/2019/02/ho...urnalism-more/

I also fondly remember when Detroit's papers consistently offered journalism worth reading, but those days are long gone. They need to reverse the trajectory they've been on for decades and offer a much better product.

Good information is a pillar of a strong democracy, and citizens of Detroit are very poorly served in this regard. I would love to support Detroit's papers, but it pains me to say this: the product they currently offer isn't usually even worth my time.

I worry they have already cut themselves to the bone -- I don't know how they'll do it -- but I hope they turn themselves around.

[Zads07]

I don't consider that I've ever paid for the news content. I consider news to be a public service, supported by advertisers. I paid for the convenience of home delivery. Remember, everything in a printed newspaper happened yesterday. At least with TV news, I could find out about things that happened today, then read about them in more detail tomorrow.

But notice, I said 'more detail'. That was when there were real reporters who went to incident scenes and gathered information first hand by talking to witnesses and officials. If you read three different papers [[which there were back then), you got details in three different ways because the reporters wrote their own stories. They didn't copy and paste off a link they clicked.

Today, I can hit five or more different 'news' websites and read exactly the same story, word for word, mistake for mistake.


I will NEVER pay for content on any website. I will never subscribe to any site that throws up a paywall.

That is really sad to hear. I hope you change your mind one day. We need people to continue to subscribe so we can get paid.

The fact you don't think you should pay for a service is incredibly sad.

[Honky Tonk]

That is really sad to hear. I hope you change your mind one day. We need people to continue to subscribe so we can get paid.

The fact you don't think you should pay for a service is incredibly sad.

I hate paying too but it's going to become a fact of life. Other than that, you're going to be led around by the nose with fake news. Hang in there Zads07. Keep doing the best you can with what you got. I hope things will get better.

[Richard]

You do understand that newspapers, most at least, have a subscription with the Associated Press, so newspapers will run AP stories a lot. Mine does.

Also, we can disagree on whether or not it's a good or a bad product, but what makes it bad, really?

Because although I will defend newspapers until my dying day, I want to know what it would take for readers to pay for content. What makes a newspaper a good product or a bad product?

I think post #8 summed it up pretty good.

But it does not appear as though the media does not choose to take into consideration what the readers are actually looking for.

[preserve]

I only subscribe to the Sunday paper, and, wonder who is stuffing the paper? I get this huge bulk, and all the flyers are packed in there twice and sometimes 3 times. My recyle bin is full of all this. Then, with all that advertising, I still have to pay more money. I read the daily on line, I miss having the paper in hand, but I am more productive without it. Bring back newsboys, give kids a job - I wouldn't mind if the paper was on my porch every day and I wouldn't mind tipping the carrier, but those days are gone.

[Lowell]

An inexpensive way to support the Free Press, as I do, is to buy an annual digital subscription. It's only $29 a year. I like the traditional newspaper format, and one can get this way, albeit one has to scroll around a bit but the feel is much the same once one gets used to it. Here is how today's front page looks.

vs. the boring online version...

I get the bulk of my news from Public Radio and Television and have supported them for several decades, to the tune of a few thousand. They have great local, state and international news, business news and features and is largely commercial free other than donor mentions at the start and finish. It's the best there is in media.

I have subscribed to Crain's for decades still getting the hard copy, but I rarely read it as I get email updates and usually end up reading items online first. I have also been doing the NY Times digital additionally attracted in that I like to do the daily crossword puzzle.

I've heard Apple is going to come out with bundle of magazines and news papers for ten a month, but it appears to be like cable in that most of the choices will be of little interest to me. However I think that will be the model going forward as more and more paywalls get erected.

Support media, particularly local media. We need in depth reporting and watchful eyes more than ever.

[carolcb]

I have read the NYT since 1982 every day. It is not that easy to do here. We have paid for home delivery since it was available in our zip code. I pay for electronic editions of the Washington Post and the Seattle Times.

Unfortunately, our local paper was purchased by Gannett and they have destroyed it.

Those of you who are complaining about the News and the Freep should thank your lucky stars. The lack of people reading the newspaper from front to back every day like my dad did is part of what is wrong with this country.

I thank God for the Sultzbegers and the Ochs and shudder at who I might be without the knowledge that comes from reading what is going on in the world. As opposed to what the Murdoch family has done.....

And yes, every time I am home, I buy the Ann Arbor News, The Detroit News and the Freep. I read the Freep on line most work days.

[jcole]

I have read the NYT since 1982 every day. It is not that easy to do here. We have paid for home delivery since it was available in our zip code. I pay for electronic editions of the Washington Post and the Seattle Times.

NYT is digital for daily and Sunday I subscribe to it and the crossword.

[65memories]

Although I started this thread because of my rant about the price, especially after reading Saturday's thin paper [[$2.50 for about 7 pages of real news), I must admit I like reading the actual print paper and will continue to so. It was a rant from an old guy who remembers when he could buy all three --- the Free Press, News and Detroit Times --- for less than a quarter. It's interesting that my sons, millennials, grew up reading the printed page and continue to do so when they get the chance. They are surprised that their friends don't read the paper, printed or online. They watched their Dad dissect the Sunday paper from front page to last. But that said, they don't possess the cultural connection to the printed word that their Dad has; heck, they probably don't remember paper boxes on corners. They don't remember the Restons, Salsingers, Roykos, Doc Greens, et al. But great journalism is a discussion for another day.