I used to read WaPo articles but gave up for 3 reasons:
1. Their paywall
2. Their heavy handed moderation in their comment sections
3. Their hard left political orientation
I think paywalls are short-sighted for news sources. You want your articles to be open and shared by as many as possible because the vast majority of people are just not going to pay for content. Bringing eyeballs to your work gives you the chance to at least make a extra few pennies on people viewing ads in addition to whatever subscription $$ you can gather. Blocking eyeballs closes off this additional revenue source..
Additionally, for most news sources, what they write is not unique. Most just reformat AP/Reuters/UPI articles, like my small, physically free (but always begging for subscriptions) local newspaper yet they still put up a paywall to block accessing more than 2 paragraphs of online content. Huh? This makes no logical or financial sense. I share pointers to articles regularly with other people but can't/won't do it if the website invokes a paywall. It's also relatively easy to find unpaywalled access to articles from the major news brokers.
Content producers should price their subscriptions using the usual 80/20 rule. Charge enough so that the 20% willing/able to pay for content support the free access of the other 80% with the idea that the other 80% will still help promote your content and perhaps allow you to scalp some additional paying customers over time.
I used to read WaPo articles but gave up for 3 reasons:
1. Their paywall
2. Their heavy handed moderation in their comment sections
3. Their hard left political orientation
I think paywalls are short-sighted for news sources. You want your articles to be open and shared by as many as possible because the vast majority of people are just not going to pay for content. Bringing eyeballs to your work gives you the chance to at least make a extra few pennies on people viewing ads in addition to whatever subscription $$ you can gather. Blocking eyeballs closes off this additional revenue source..
Additionally, for most news sources, what they write is not unique. Most just reformat AP/Reuters/UPI articles, like my small, physically free (but always begging for subscriptions) local newspaper yet they still put up a paywall to block accessing more than 2 paragraphs of online content. Huh? This makes no logical or financial sense. I share pointers to articles regularly with other people but can't/won't do it if the website invokes a paywall. It's also relatively easy to find unpaywalled access to articles from the major news brokers.
Content producers should price their subscriptions using the usual 80/20 rule. Charge enough so that the 20% willing/able to pay for content support the free access of the other 80% with the idea that the other 80% will still help promote your content and perhaps allow you to scalp some additional paying customers over time.