poliphilo: (Default)
poliphilo ([personal profile] poliphilo) wrote2010-03-27 08:59 am

Rise And Shine

I was awake this morning before seven. I usually complain about the jiggery-pokery of British Summer Time, but the weather right now is lovely and I can see the point of adjusting the clocks so seven becomes eight.  All that excellent daylight: it's a shame to waste it.

First thing I do most mornings is go to the Times website to see if anything has happened over night. Will I still be doing this when access costs £I a day or £2 a week? Of course not.  

[identity profile] idahoswede.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 10:38 am (UTC)(link)
Like you, I will not be accessing the Times on-line when they institute the charge.

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 11:13 am (UTC)(link)
They say Rupert Mudoch doesn't access the Internet and has only just started using email. I can believe it.

[identity profile] daisytells.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 04:16 pm (UTC)(link)
I, too, start the day by looking at the Times (New York Times) on line. If they expect me to subscribe, then I too will forego the pleasure.
Remember free TV? It seems like everything carries a charge nowadays. What next?

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 04:41 pm (UTC)(link)
In Britain we pay a yearly license fee- which goes to fund the BBC- for the privilege of owning a TV set- so our viewing has never been free.

I think Murdoch is making a big mistake in placing his newspapers behind a pay-wall, but we'll see.
sovay: (Psholtii: in a bad mood)

[personal profile] sovay 2010-03-27 04:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Will I still be doing this when access will cost £I a day or £2 a week? Of course not.

Wait, we're going to have to pay for the Times online? When did this happen?

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 05:02 pm (UTC)(link)
It was announced yesterday, but doesn't come into force until June.

Apparently Rupert Murdoch doesn't have enough money...
sovay: (PJ Harvey: crow)

[personal profile] sovay 2010-03-27 05:11 pm (UTC)(link)
Apparently Rupert Murdoch doesn't have enough money...

Color me unthrilled.

[identity profile] ideealisme.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 06:09 pm (UTC)(link)
I loathe that slimy antipodean...but I do see the justice of writers' being paid for their efforts.

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 08:05 pm (UTC)(link)
The question is, "will it work?" Will people pay for the Times online when there are so many other news sites that are free?

[identity profile] ooxc.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 06:14 pm (UTC)(link)
Hallo again,. friend of friend.
Does your local library keep it?
I know that doesn't solve the first thing in the morning thing, but I sometimes go for days without buying a paaper or reading it online - and they keep it indefinitely.

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2010-03-27 08:09 pm (UTC)(link)
Hi.

I expect it does. In the past I've gone to public libraries to read the papers.

[identity profile] qatsi.livejournal.com 2010-03-28 10:46 am (UTC)(link)
I heard somewhere that the plan is not designed so much to get money from the Internet, as to boost the print circulation of the papers. Either way, I don't think it's going to work and I won't be sorry to see it blow up in Murdoch's face.

My paper of choice is The Independent. I hope its new owner doesn't make any radical changes to the content. Still, Russian ownership seems largely to work for LJ, so fingers crossed ...

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2010-03-28 11:52 am (UTC)(link)
I'm inclined to think that Murdoch's time has passed- and that he doesn't understand the brave new world created by the internet- but, then, do any of us?

I won't particularly miss The Times. I'm more at home with The Indy and the Guardian.