I just got the kind invitation from the publisher of the Hong Kong based South China Morning Post for a three-month free subscription on their website. He flatters a bit my weblog, but unfortunately illustrate to have no clue how these new media work.Basically the paper remains behind a firewall and lifting it for me for three months does not help me to use one of the most important features of the new media: the link. As long as I cannot link to them, why should I actually bother to spend my time reading their paper or even pay for it?
The South China Morning Post has decided not to become part of the ongoing debate I'm happy to belong to. As others have said, survival is not mandatory.
Update: Danny Levinson builds further on the case on the poor performance of the traditional media going online in "Dow Jones gets what it deserves in Murdoch".
5 comments:
so, did you accept their offer?
Still pondering. I have not seen their product for five years, so would be interesting to see how they are doing, even though it is only for three months.
You should stand by your convictions and not accept their offer. Who knows, you might actually find content worth referencing ... and you wouldn't want that!
Just imagine, I would find there something interesting and cannot link to it. Better not to know then.
Actually, some weblogs with less respect for financial firewalls do copy-and-past interesting articles to their website in full, so I can link when needed. Happens at least once or twice a month.
More comments here:
http://poynter.org/column.asp?id=31&aid=127109
Post a Comment