Blogcritics: Comments on Web newspaper registration stirs debate

Comment by Ken Edwards

Sun, 20 Jun 2004 02:05:49 EDT

and that is a major problem with that horse manure! They are gathering all this personal data, and people just get so pissed off about it they fill in bogus data. like they are 90 yrs. old, have only a hight school education, yet earn 150 thou a year. who wins when people do this? is this an accurate way to gauge advertising or readership? its just plain pathetic that i cannot go to a newspaper's site that is in my own county and read their news without signing up for an account, obviously asking me things like what occupation i work in, etc, etc. i just don;t get it and never will. if you subscribe to the print, and want to get to online archives then they obviously have you name, address, phone, etc, etc. there ya go, their is a paying customer, treat him like a friggin' customer and not some random web surfer who is just wondering about wanting to read the news on your site. by the way, what the heck is an archive of a newspaper gonna make money from? why should this have value attached to it? i can go to the library and find that crap on micro fish if i wanted to, or i could go online. which are you going to do? that one always puzzled me too.

Comment by I.M. Spartacus

Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:28:37 EDT

Newspapers have no right to demand personal information from paying subscribers. I have paid a lot of money for my Atlanta Journal-Constitution subscription over the years, but when I needed to access their online edition for archived articles they treated me like just one more crop to be harvested from their data farm. How old are you, how much money do you make, etc., etc. I was so insulted that I just made up answers (it was fun to cut some years off my age!). Seriously, no newspaper should ever ask anything from paying subscribers except their account numbers. If they keep offending their subscribers, they will lose us.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 08:17:21 EDT

Mac is right about the out of town, looking up one story thing - since they are already tracking yo ass, you shouldn't have to register until at least the second visit. I don't mind registering as long as I don't have to pay - I see registering as my payment. What I really hate is having to reregister periodically when I delete my cookies. I wish there was an easy way to separate out the cookies I don't want to see deleted but when there are hundreds it takes to much time and effort to try to figure out which one applies to which site.

Comment by RJ Elliott

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:08:34 EDT

Look, I find those registration pages as annoying as the next person. But there is no such thing as a free lunch. If you wanna read the paper for free on the 'net, you have to get through that page. It's the "cost" of being able to read it for free. A minor cost, IMO. Anyway, good post. You brought up a topic that deserves debate.

Comment by Ken Edwards

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:03:44 EDT

RJ, in most cases you are right.

Comment by RJ Elliott

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:54:25 EDT

But reading a paper on the 'net is free. ;-)

Comment by Ken Edwards

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:38:08 EDT

Mac Diva, I do prefer print when it is this convenient. Of all the things I use my Tungsten T3 for, I stopped using AvantGo a while ago. I for a while had a bunch of sites sync'd to my Palm all the time. Never used it. Just never clicked with me. Which is odd considering the amount of sites I do read online (of course those don't have paper counterparts). I hear you on hurry up and wait - I just get out a mag or paper, thats just me.

Comment by Mac Diva

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:25:50 EDT

Ken, are you saying you prefer to read the hard copy if it is convenient? I used to, but for the last couple years, at least, I do most of my NYT, WSJ and WaPo reading on my PDA. I just pop it open while doing various hurry up and wait things. That can also be a way around registration, though I'm registered with all three. Avantgo, the mobile device syndicator, will get all the major stories without the hassle of registrations or sign-ins.

Comment by Ken Edwards

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:22:06 EDT

Well, I had this beef before I knew what the heck a blog was. I can name many people who also have no clue what a blog is that have a major beef about this registration issue. But I do see your point about an echo chamber, I am just not coming from that mindset on this issue.

Comment by Ken Edwards

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:15:36 EDT

True. But I am lucky enough to be able to walk across campus and be able to pick up both the NYT and the WSJ :)

Comment by Mac Diva

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:13:36 EDT

The registration also helps with the occassional person who causes the paper libel problems, abuses other users or uses the site for commercial purposes. Even though people might go to the trouble of phony registration, most won't. And, if barred, the person will have register over and over again. However, I won't register unless it is a major site or one I will use regularly. It is ridiculous to do so as a visitor to a newspaper from out-of-state interested in one story, for example. It would be better to ask people to register if they have visited the site several times.

Comment by RJ Elliott

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:08:02 EDT

The NYT and WSJ both require registration. And they are two of the most important online newspapers in the country. Boycotting them really limits oneself.

Comment by Howard Owens

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:01:23 EDT

There is a very big reason newspaper sites will continue to require registration: It works. It's making them money. People register. And enough people register honestly that it's worthwhile. And hardly anybody complains. Honestly. The blogosphere is a big echo chamber where all they hear is other bloggers complaining. But outside the echo chamber, regular users rarely complain about registration. And if you're worried about e-mail ... read the site's privacy policy. That's a contract. No major media company is going to put itself at risk by violating that contract with its users.