How Murdoch's Paywalls Meant Some News It Broke Went Unnoticed & Uncredited

from the whoops dept

The saga of how ridiculously disappointing News Corps.' paywalls have been continues. We've already seen that the number of subscribers looks dismal, advertisers are running away and even publicists are avoiding pitching The Times stories, because it's just not worth it, considering the diminished audience. Now, as a bunch of you sent in, it's gotten so bad that when The Times actually breaks a story, almost no one notices -- and the eventual "credit" for breaking the story goes elsewhere.

Apparently, The Times first had a particular political insider story concerning UK politics -- but the story got almost no attention until nine days later when a blog called Labour Uncut re-"broke" the story and got all the credit for it. That seems only likely to drive tipsters to make sure to avoid the Murdoch paywalled papers even more.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    kyle clements (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 2:28pm

    bloging

    I never thought about that.

    For a blogger, paywalls could be VERY beneficial. if no one else is reading the stories, they can subscribe to a few sources, copy/paste, reword a few things, and publish important stories that no one else has seen, and they get to take all the credit, and earn a few pennies from adsense while they're at it.

    Brilliant!

    The only loser is the owner of the pay-walled site!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    sehlat (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 2:47pm

    Re: bloging

    Aha! The Judith Griggs approach to blogging?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Jake, Nov 15th, 2010 @ 2:47pm

    You could perhaps have chosen a better example with which to criticise the paywall. Some nonentity who had a few minor jobs in the previous administration being offered an admin post in the party is hardly front-page material.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Blatant Coward (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 2:48pm

    Heh.

    I like how one of the commenter's on the blog says:

    "Paul Staines says:
    November 12, 2010 at 3:12 pm

    As seen in the Times a couple of weeks ago."

    I would like to ask this guy "By who?" but I don't know enough about prime ministers to defeat their spam thing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 2:56pm

    Re: Re: bloging

    Please, Griggs totally pirated Lily Allen's pirate blogging technique....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 15th, 2010 @ 3:09pm

    Re: Heh.

    Tony Blair

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 3:11pm

    Re:

    Rather the point. There is no front page at The Times web site.

    I have to wonder if the dead tree version is now sold in a plain paper wrapper, to prevent 'theft' of their stories from passers by.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    ervserver (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 3:46pm

    Many suffer because of Murdoch

    Because of Murdoch and his stupid ideas many suffer in their careers

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    qyiet (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 3:54pm

    It's a PR Dream

    If you have something you have to announce, but you want to miss the news cycle, instead of throwing it to the press at 5pm on a friday, just drop it to the Times.

    By the time anyone notices it'll be old news.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    Yaniel (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 4:25pm

    This story makes me happy. Anything that might lead to the downfall of Murdoch is OK with me.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    vastrightwing, Nov 15th, 2010 @ 4:58pm

    snicker

    LOL

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    The Groove Tiger (profile), Nov 15th, 2010 @ 5:17pm

    Re:

    The front-page of The Times is too full of paywall to have room for any front-page material.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, Nov 15th, 2010 @ 5:21pm

    Maybe no TImes readers cared.

    Comments such as "make Iraq a glass parking lot" pass without notice on "right wing", neo-con, RINO sites. It's only when opposition gets hold of it that it's seized on and denounced.

    [Sometimes your lousy grammar *cannot* be overlooked:
    You've a habit of duplicating words in the same sentence.
    "The continuing saga of how ridiculously disappointing News Corps.' paywalls have been continued."
    It doesn't scan or parse. Might if last word was "continues" but still unnecessarily duplicates words.]

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 15th, 2010 @ 6:46pm

    Re: Maybe no TImes readers cared.

    Might if last word was "continues" but still unnecessarily duplicates words. [sic]

    It might if the last word was "continues", but it still unnecessarily duplicates words.

    There, I corrected your bad grammar.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    timhj, Nov 15th, 2010 @ 7:58pm

    Paying subscribers get stories 9 days before anyone else?

    Your story is also a good ad for why 'news inclined' people would benefit from subscribing to the times. ;)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 15th, 2010 @ 11:54pm

    Re: Paying subscribers get stories 9 days before anyone else?

    But is a Murdoch publication and we all know they tend to just make crap up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    abc gum, Nov 16th, 2010 @ 4:50am

    Re: bloging

    Or possibly, a paywalled site steals a story from a blogger which is then stolen by a blogger which is ...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    Idobek (profile), Nov 16th, 2010 @ 5:11am

    A sign of The Times

    I now find out what is in the Times by reading the Telegraph's "The Times is reporting..." stories in the blogs section.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Gwiz, Nov 16th, 2010 @ 7:20am

    I foresee this "experiment" coming to end eventually with a Murdoch or two claiming "The paywalls were a huge success - we just decided to end them"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    DH's Love Child (profile), Nov 16th, 2010 @ 7:36am

    Re: It's a PR Dream

    Seems like the perfect way to bury a story.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    icon
    TtfnJohn (profile), Nov 16th, 2010 @ 11:19am

    It's Not News When....

    No one can see it.

    Even Murdoch must understand that. Or you'd think he would.

    Then again, he's the man who almost singlehandedly destroyed Australian journalism by buying up everything in sight before he moved on the Europe and now the United States to do the same thing there.

    While it's sad to see the decline and impending fall of one of the "newspapers of record" in the English speaking world perhaps it will convince it's namesake in New York to put the brakes on it's plans to hide behind a paywall. Then again, maybe not.

    The Wall Street Journal gets away with it, sort of, because it has pretty much got a captive audience who aren't convinced they can get the "inside dirt" on the financial industry anywhere else.

    Come to think of it, how many stories do you see since THAT paywall went up that credit the WSJ for anything?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), Nov 16th, 2010 @ 6:35pm

    Re: bloging

    Maybe this is actually the careful planning of the newspapers, who also support hot news laws. Sure, the paywall may not bring in much cash, but if another publication with deeper pockets then a random blogger was to run with the story as "new" they could be open to copyright lawsuits :D

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    adnan, Nov 16th, 2010 @ 11:42pm

    all

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    David, Nov 23rd, 2010 @ 7:10am

    story

    Thanks for the plug. Unfortunately this wasn't some clever Machiavellian scheme to steal content - we, like most other people by the sounds of it don't subscribe to the Times so have no access.

    We missed the story like all the other political press (although it now appears the Times didn't help themselves by spiking the story with a throw away line rather than going big on the story). A week or so later we heard about it from sources and reported it.

    So we were late to the party with everyone else, and still got the credit for breaking the story.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This