News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

TransitBart said:
Journalism was not free until the past 20 years
Click to expand...
You've missed the qualifier in this instance: "On the internet". Advertising was thought to be able to cover the costs for newspapers publishing internet editions. In many cases, it didn't, compound with the fact that some newspapers (news-sources) were incredibly inept with their business models. Compound that again with the iMe devices and the hordes of instant gratification 140 character consumers, and it spelled 'death knell' for a lot of yesterday's news providers.

The Star might be yet again botching their business model, we'll see. What I refuse to pay for is blurbs of pseudo-info aimed at the walking mindless with their iMeMyself tablet in their hands. There's a hope on TorStar's part that persons willing to pay for real journalism will subscribe to them. The Star has dumped a lot of their serious journalists years ago to chase the iVanity crowd. (Some still remain, but rarely featured on their pre-digested pap page for zombies).

The gig may already be up for the Star, we'll see. The Star has certainly tapped into a new vein in the last few weeks with their cycling and road safety issues. Note that's something no-one else in Toronto is doing, and they might have found a vein with enough blood to sustain paid readership. I certainly hope so, but many serious readers have already left for the Globe, which has had a series of failed on-line experiments itself. The Globe now seems to have it right, although the business model combined with the paper edition is quite different from the Star's. I'm still a bit perplexed as to the StarMetro business case.
StarMetro (also known as The Star and formerly branded as Metro) is a chain of Canadian free daily newspapers published in Calgary, Edmonton, Halifax, Toronto, and Vancouver. The chain is a joint venture between the Canadian publishing conglomerate Torstar (90%) and Swedish global media company Metro International (10%). The chain was originally branded as Metro prior to rebranding on April 10, 2018.[1] It is no longer affiliated with the French-language Métro newspaper published by TC Transcontinental in Montreal.

As Metro
The first Canadian newspaper owned by Metro International was launched in Toronto in 2000. The launch sparked a newspaper war as two of the city's major dailies, the Toronto Star and Toronto Sun, both responded by producing their own free versions aimed at commuters.[2] Metro Toronto merged with GTA Today, owned by the Toronto Star's parent company Torstar Corporation, in 2001.[3]

Metro International sold 40 percent of its 50 percent share in all of its English-language Canadian papers to Torstar on October 14, 2011.[4] The Metro papers in Regina, Saskatoon and London ceased publication in 2014.[5] The chain's operations in Ottawa and Winnipeg were closed in November 2017 as part of an asset swap between Torstar and Postmedia Network that also resulted in the acquisition and closure of the rival 24 Hours chain in English Canada.[6][7][8]

StarMetro rebranding
The English-Canadian Metro papers were rebranded to StarMetro on April 10, 2018. As part of the rebranding, online news operations were consolidated with the Toronto Star and the former Metro News website was redirected to the Star's website.[1] The StarMetro chain also officially adopted the same socially liberal, progressive "Atkinson Principles" as the Toronto Star.[1][9]
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarMetro_(newspaper)

From the new StarMetro corporate website:
upload_2018-7-1_9-58-26.png

http://www.starmetromedia.com/

One of three alternating banners on the opening page. It leaves me uneasy to read that. Their cause d'etre is to sell messages, and yet they want you to pay for their internet access?

That's the crux of both the business case, and the 'social' case of the 'Atkinson agenda' clashing. Of course, you can't have it both ways, but the Globe is in the black (one of very few print mediums in Canada to do so) and not having to 'appeal to all types' to do it. Their appeal is quality journalism.

A poster above (Transit Bart?) mentioned The Economist. Always an excellent read, has been for eons, but not local and daily content.

To discuss the meaningfulness and quality of today's news is inseparable from a public, at least in the developed world, with a measurably diminishing IQ and awareness of issues, both local and global.

This is the complete opposite of what was touted to happen with the internet. The world is at the fingertips of swaths of people, and they get their news from the likes of Facebook et al. WTF?

The Globe has dealt with this quite well considering (full disclosure, I was close to a number of persons at the Globe, including Editorial), but the Star catered to disposable news bytes in the recent past, and a format for instant plastic emulsion. And it was a business failure. The crowd they catered to wouldn't pay for content then, they won't now. So perhaps the Star can save themselves and pull out of the death dive they were in by catering to a public with enough belief in issues to pay to underwrite them. We'll see.

Again, I am very impressed with the new emphasis on real street issues in the Star the last week, and the apparent attempt to keep it front page...I've already sent some material to the lead author on the subject.

Quick Addendum:
On a huge up-note, and there will only be a few disagreements in this string on this: Post Media is taking an absolute drubbing. There's little to defend at the Stun, but at least the Pest has some excellent journalists amongst the raving reactionaries (I remember when Corcoran 'Corky' wrote for the Globe) and an outstanding managing ed (Coyne), but alas, one only has to view their opening web-page to see they're desperately selling themselves for drugs (legit ones,, but still...).

The *Real* question is: "How much longer can the Post Diggers survive?" (and featuring the criminal Conrad Black defending Trump to grovel for a pardon is pathetic)

Post Addendum (pun fully intended):

I sit corrected on Coyne!
JAMES BRADSHAWBANKING REPORTER
PUBLISHED OCTOBER 19, 2015
UPDATED MAY 15, 2018

Andrew Coyne has resigned as editor of editorials and comments at the National Post, but will stay on as a columnist, after clashing with the newspaper's proprietors.

The well-regarded political journalist stepped down over what he calls "a professional disagreement" with senior figures at Postmedia Network Canada Corp., the company that owns the Post and numerous daily papers from Montreal to Vancouver. He had wanted to publish a column disagreeing with the Post's editorial endorsement of the Conservative Party for Monday's federal vote.

The editorial is written by the newspaper's editorial board, of which Mr. Coyne was the head, but its conclusion was dictated by Postmedia. The company's leadership believed a dissenting column from Mr. Coyne "would have confused readers and embarrassed the paper," he said in a post on Twitter. [...]
Click to expand...
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rep...l-post-will-remain-columnist/article26868832/
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-1_9-58-26.png
    upload_2018-7-1_9-58-26.png
    470.5 KB · Views: 1,954
Last edited:
I was a Toronto Star subscriber for the longest time, but because it watered itself down significantly, I decided to find other news sources that don't pander to the knee-jerk cyan canary crowd.

Wikipedia isn't perfect, but it is the closest to having comprehensive coverage that is mainly reliably sourced.

What do you think, @steveintoronto ?
 
Johnny Au said:
I was a Toronto Star subscriber for the longest time, but because it watered itself down significantly, I decided to find other news sources that don't pander to the knee-jerk cyan canary crowd.

Wikipedia isn't perfect, but it is the closest to having comprehensive coverage that is mainly reliably sourced.

What do you think, @steveintoronto ?
Click to expand...
Wikipedia is a valuable reference, but even it must produce reference (which is almost always the case) to buttress its points to make a convincing read.

Absolutely agreed on the Star. I hope they pull their sorry ass out of the pap sewer. They really did toss out the kernel and kept the cob in the name of being progressive. If they're charging for content, they'd better offer something unique and meaningful.

Their WSJ articles like this one that they're charging to view?

It's available free on the web.

TorStar sold themselves to the plastic disposable 140 character crowd, and almost killed themselves doing it, because some idiot 'marketing guru' told them to.

The Star is now making a classic mistake (again): Not offering 'free tasters'. I now go to their opening page, see what they have to offer (very little is unique) and Google to see who's got copy on the story. The Star is going to lose unless they loosen up a bit more on the paywall. The trick is to feed their 'regulars' the basic meal, and then charge for dessert and drinks.

Even Rupert (tightwad) Murdoch has learned that one, which is why Googling that article title gets it for free from the WSJ directly.

Not sure on their WashPost material. I'll check when opportune and report back here.
 
Last edited:
steveintoronto said:
I do too, albeit I negotiated a lower price for it.

That's damn cheap internet cost, must be part of a contract package, no?
Click to expand...

We were in the UK at the time - GBP9 /mo = C$15/mo.

We're now back in Canada and have both an electronic Globe subscription, as well as a paper Saturday subscription. The latter is essentially just a charitable donation, and we want our kids to see us reading "real" papers once in a while.
 
UserNameToronto said:
We were in the UK at the time - GBP9 /mo = C$15/mo.

We're now back in Canada and have both an electronic Globe subscription, as well as a paper Saturday subscription. The latter is essentially just a charitable donation, and we want our kids to see us reading "real" papers once in a while.
Click to expand...
Internet in the UK: It's a mixed bag, you must have been in one of the large conurbations, but that's way cheaper than here. That being said, most anywhere is way cheaper than here. And the Continent is about half the cost of the UK even!

Something odd is going on with my Globe and Mail account though. They had jacked it up without informing me, so I'd cancelled it. It's still in effect. I have the nagging feeling that's because they haven't actually cancelled it, and it will appear on my next credit card statement again at full price. One deals with a call centre somewhere off-shore.

and we want our kids to see us reading "real" papers once in a while.
Click to expand...
It does keep the medium anchored. Congrats to you for doing that. It's akin to showing where food comes from by having a garden.
 
steveintoronto said:
Internet in the UK: It's a mixed bag, you must have been in one of the large conurbations, but that's way cheaper than here. That being said, most anywhere is way cheaper than here. And the Continent is about half the cost of the UK even!
Click to expand...

We were in Islington, central London (border of Zone 1/2). Telecom was 1/3 the cost vs. Canada.

It does keep the medium anchored. Congrats to you for doing that. It's akin to showing where food comes from by having a garden.
Click to expand...

That's a kind thing to say - thank you. As parents, we try.
 
Wiki isn't accurate and you can find more accurate info scattered through well known established sites. Apart from wiki what other outlets have you guys looked into?
 
Johnny Au said:
I was a Toronto Star subscriber for the longest time, but because it watered itself down significantly, I decided to find other news sources that don't pander to the knee-jerk cyan canary crowd.
Click to expand...
I won’t pay for the Star, but I have this week subscribed to the Washington Post, at least for the one free month. Good articles, a fantatiscally easy to use webpage, and no ads online.
 
Fresco said:
The way to get around paywalls is to use a cloacking site:

http://www.internetcloak.com/

https://www.magiccloak.net/
Click to expand...
It doesn't get you into subscription only sites that require a cookie. and only does what 'stealth mode' does on most browsers. "Incognito" on Chrome and Chromium and "Private Window" on Firefox and "New Private Tab" on Brave, which is stealth by design anyway.

None of these will get you around the paywall at some sites. There's other ways to do that...(one of them being to actually subscribe, some being introductory offers that are incredibly cheap, unsubscribe when they run out, and subscribe again for the offer under another email address and name. (It's sometimes necessary to use a different browser too for that)

Nuff said on that one...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top