The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

On Monday, the Tulsa World will begin delivering "metered" content.  That means a subscription is required for viewing anything other than index pages.  Those without a subscription will be limited to 10 pages per month.  The lowest rate for full access is the $12/mo Sunday only paper delivery.  If you want digital access only, that's $15/mo.

That's right.  Dead trees on your doorstep and unlimited access for $12, while a digital subscription that involves far less in delivery costs is priced at $15.  What's wrong with this picture?

The paper tried erecting a paywall once before.  It didn't work.  Does anyone know why?

To make it just that much more interesting, the comments sections are disabled on the subscription announcement pages.  Apparently they really don't care what we have to say.

By the way, the New York Times is doing this too, but they're 'metering' readers to 20 pages per month.  Perhaps the Tulsa World is delivering better content that justifies fewer pages.  Perhaps.

 

I see why they are doing this, but those who only read online will simply quit reading it. I don't think very many will actually buy a subscription.

I've had a household subscription for years to the Whirld, but each month I keep asking myself why I should prolong the cost, plus the fact that whatever person(s) delivers these annointed vessels of knowledge to my door can't seem to find the doorstep, but often finds the neighbor's driveway.

Which usually leaves me scanning the Whirld website if I am desperate for coverage on a particular item,  because the vessel of knowledge, about 4-6 times a month is residing on a neighbor's coffee table.
Replacement copies are promptly delivered, in their favor, usually by 11 or so, on the day the complaint was made.   But by then, who cares?  

Unless you are interested in an issue that might have some deeper background, such as Dewey's latest pranks, or the latest filings from Dewey's arch enemies, it's news that is over a day old.  

And more and more, a filter is required in the thought process when reading their reporting, IMHO.

Detail and background are the only reasons that make me keep the subscribing to it..

The online Whirld archives are helpful in some of the research that I do; but
I am really trying to decide if the cost is worth the benefit.   It seems like every other month the bill for putting "trees on my doorstep" just inches a little higher.  Never announced, just gone up by 50 cents or so.

The paywall may be the brick that caused the whole stack to fall.

I dont remember the specifics of why it failed, just that it failed.
I believe that even verified subscribers could only view so much content at a time, and even failed page loads worked against your limit.

Im seeing this as a big nail in the coffin of their print operation.
I wouldnt want to see them fold because they are a good research resource, and offer more substance than the broadcasters.

The biggest problem with broadcasters websites is that they are just cut-and-paste from their teleprompter.  There is usually no more content online than what was aired, despite the fact that the time constraints that limit the broadcast script arent there on the web.  When they push "see us on the web" there's really no reason to if there is no additional content to see.  They simply arent geared to take advantage of the opportunity in front of them, and that's been the World's web advantage -- sofar.

Newspapers are struggling.  No doubt about it.  But broadcast journalism doesn't have to in-depth content to fill the void, as Patric pointed out.  Getting local stories will be more difficult without the World.

As an experiment, I added the local television news pages to my Morning Coffee list.  It's not very inspiring.  In fact, I can probably get almost as much information from the World's main index page.  I'm trying NewsOK too, but it always makes me want to wash my hands.

I thought the main revenue stream for a newspaper came from advertising, not subscriptions.  The World is no slouch at delivering the ads, but I have to wonder if a downturn in the number of on-line readers will affect their ad rates.  It shouldn't since they don't carry ads on the web edition.  Still, you have to wonder why they'd ignore such a potential source of funds.

I'd consider paying a modest fee for web access, but certainly not more than the dead tree version.  That's just crazy.

 

I have often wondered about the logic of charging as much for either web or even CD/DVD copies of something that would normally be a large printed book.

We will all look back on the past 20 years of free internet sites and recall the wonderful embryonic daze of the start of the internet. Get ready to pay for all outside network data and info that arrive vis a vie broadband.
The writing is on the wall.

The internets are for scoundrels! Why else would we be hanging out on TNF! :D

http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/notaro20110309

It has been tried, and failed, but much greater papers than the Tulsa World.  Unfortunately the net affect appears to be to make that news outlet less relevant.   I subscribe, so it doesn't change my view - other than make it more annoying to view online content and make it less likely it will be linked.

Think we'll start seeing some of our angrier posters back?

Anybody but Gretchen Wyler...;)

I watched "Facchhhhkkkkkkkxxxxzzzzzzzz 23" this morning for about an hour, and realized what a monumental waste of an opportunity their news block is.

Having been there, done that, the news model is based on a 5-12 minute audience turnover, and the rates are based appropriately on the percentage of viewership, that's a given. (The repeat of the weather forecast every 6 minutes tells me that it may be less than that, either that or I should be insulted because some consultant somewhere in his parents' basement doesn't think I'm smart enough to remember what just ran a few minutes back.)

There has been a couple of  attempts on the part of Facchhhhkkkkkkkxxxxzzzzzzzz 23" to do some relevant, investigative journalism, but it usually winds up being something shocking (titillating?), like the number of massage parlors that operate in Tulsa or sitting in a parking lot taping some hooker a block away talking to a potential customer ,and these are run during the fall or spring ratings sweeps.

To set up an investigative unit that actually covered something other than massage parlors would take a major commitment in dollars and other resources, and Griffin Communications has come the closest to that with their unit in our local markets.

But as viewers can see every morning, instead of some real meat being produced and people made uncomfortable by a real exposure of a fact that will make someone, somewhere, in power perhaps squirm over their morning coffee and consider packing for a quick trip, the general format is talking heads, and rescued dog stories.  This being led with, as patric pointed out,  the cut and paste crime and wreck headlines.  But, ". .if it bleeds, it leads".

There will always be a place for the journalist who really digs, and presents deep background, and in that vein, I think the "newspaper' faction of the 4th estate will survive in some form, and this is probably going to be where the Whirld will wind up.  But the print production of the business, as we have already seen, is not going to be so much a factor in the coming future.

 

There is a hard time to come up with enough original content to even bother charging for it.

I'm with those of you that would be willing to pay, but not more than a paper subscription. I'd be willing to pay around ~$75/year.

Interesting article-

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-the-tulsa-world-will-put-up-a-paywall/

The New York Times spent $40 million designing and implementing their paywall, which is easily circumvented by deleting the NYT cookie the website installs on your computer.  This method works for Tulsa World, too.  You can also block tulsaworld.com from installing a cookie on your computer.  This does, however, cause an annoying problem of the page continuing to reload itself, obviously trying to reinstall the cookie that it is not allowed to do.  I'm not smart enough to find a work around, but someone will soon enough.

Edit - Fixed!  Thanks to an anonymous Tulsa Now friend.

This is the end of my reading the Tulsa World. I've never had a subscription, owing that to my coming into adulthood in the (beginning of) internet age. I can get news anywhere without paying for it.

And Gretchen is such a d-bag. She is obviously hardcore right wing, but post such veiled racist and completely unsubstantiated bs. She's a typical regurgitator if talk radio fear. I won't miss that.

Tulsa TV's investigative reporting (independent of police handouts) essentially ended in the early 80's when Ch.2 decided to follow up on the annual Christmas "dont-drink-and-drive" message by setting up an ambush interview outside Southern Hills during the FOP Christmas party.  When they aired a bunch of LEOs on-camera leaving drunk, police retaliated by telling officers to not grant interviews to any media, not just Ch. 2, as a way of asserting they have their hands on the information spigot.

When they begin encrypting their radio traffic in the next few weeks to shut out the media, it's probably going to hit the fan again.

Now, as far as the World, Im a paid subscriber and I still think the metering is a horrible idea.  Those annoying ads should have been providing them with enough revenue to put their on-line product in front of as many eyes as possible, but by limiting their exposure, they are also limiting that revenue stream.

This is the TW we're talking about, it's trivial to circumvent their 10 article limit. Whoever it is that does their web site's programming is lazy, stupid, or both. Well, there is another possibility: nobody actually cares to implement effective access controls.

Someone decided that the best way to alert you that you've gone over your article quota was to load the article and then put some crap in front of it to warn you that you'd hit your limit. Of course, any modern browser has a function by which you can delete arbitrary page elements on the fly, and doing so lets you read the article. (and it could be automated with greasemonkey)

However, having seen that they have decided to use shady methods (http://samy.pl/evercookie/) to keep their cookies around on my browser, I'm not terribly interested in giving them my ad views anyway.

Edited to add: It turns out you can find the person's name in one of the javascript files included on the homepage. I'll leave it up to the reader to stalk and/or send hate mail.

     After years of using the website, and being a some what loyal reader and customer of the printed product, although from time to time having vehemently disagreed with their editorial opinions, it has come to a point that I feel they are no longer involved enough in the community to provide unbiased journalism  to the unwashed, which I am a loyal member of.  As one forum member said, "..the viewpoint of the few, not the many."
     There are many voices in any political forum, some just making noise, some with a valid viewpoint, and a few that really want the outcome of the forum and discussion to be goals that are attainable, with the outcome of the forum being a better city. This is called discussion, or politics, which is compromise, which should lead to some action, hopefully, progress and growth for a city, or at least the solution to one specific problem.
    IMHO, the World is still participating in the forum, but the bias has filtered down to all levels of the operation; and the daily reporting has become a victim of that.
   That news organizations predominantly follow the viewpoint of ownership and upper management is a historical fact, but the ones that can keep editorial separate from reporting the facts, generally are the ones that will survive.
   RIP, Tulsa World.
   
   
 

One of three major US papers that increased market penetration last year.

(http://cot.ag/ekQ7MA)

I'm sure that is due to online numbers, not print. Online is likely only up because it's free and they have been putting it on mobile devices.

Absolutely sure?  They may know magics.

Online news sources that rely on advertising succeed, because they can be freely linked to and referenced from outside of their walls.

Those who choose subscription based income, lose the casual reader, and a significant amount of advertising revenue generated through click-through tracking.

This is a very poor business decision based on a very old-fashioned world-view.

It was a long road coming.
"The issue is a sensitive one to newspapers and the newspaper industry. In recent years, several large daily newspapers have admitted to falsifying circulation figures and paid large settlements to advertisers as a result." http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=12465.195

I can't begrudge the newspaper needing a way to ensure they can stay afloat in an era when print is dying a slow death in an information world which is amazingly fast.  That said, there's too many other places to get breaking news related to Tulsa (the four network affiliates are one place) so I won't miss it.

We get a hard copy here at work because the boss likes to browse it, so I can always read it for free.  I've not had a personal subscription to the World in at least 10 years.  It's really not that relevant to me.

As Nathan said, whoever designed their website was lazy and/or cheap. Just for fun I decided to see if the whole ten page limit thing works. It doesn't. It gave me that little box about ten times, and has now resorted to letting me view every article I click on. Ha! $14.99 subscription. Yeah right.

Apparently they do hide cookies in places your browser isnt aware, such as your Flash player:
http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/help/settings_manager07.html

  I have stopped reading them all together and now use the other local news sources more, so no big deal.  Plus my major, world news sources are free like the BBC and Science Daily so I get plenty of info to enjoy browsing.

That and your standard browser cookies are 2 of the 7 or 8. They also use HTML5 local storage, Silverlight, and a some others. They use evercookie (http://samy.pl/evercookie/) which, like annoying spyware, replaces all of its elements if you don't manage to zap them all at the same time.

And given its use of Flash and Silverlight "cookies", it keeps things around even if you switch browsers.

For the past several days, although I am not a subscriber, I have been able to access the Tulsa World website without the subcription pop-up. When they made it subscription service only, I checked in from time to time to see what headlines were up and to read some of the comments which usually followed a quick Google search for other free news sources. Now, I can check any articles and as many articles as I want without the pop-up prompting me to subscribe. Is anyone else experiencing this?

I think you get ten page views a month then you get the pop up.  I'm still getting the pop up.

Don't use Flash or Silverlight. problem solved.

I've been viewing TW just fine without a subscription.  ;)

So now we get to see the Tulsa Whirled even less.  The advertisers must be thrilled!

It's gotten me to use other sources for local news.  I don't feel like I'm missing much.

I'm happy they've removed my ability to read the comments sections of their stories.

The most grand side effect!  My blood pressure, emotional state and general intelligence have both improved.

Agreed.  Now I can pretend there are less of those folks in my town.

It's almost as if the Sally Kern/Rex Duncan Army doesn't exist anymore.

Don't use a modern browser or let your browser download images plus the above steps and you'll be fine. ;)

Anyone experiencing full-screen popups with sound on the World site?
I thought it might have been a virus when it first happened but it's only occurred on the TW site.
It was the classic scam pupup saying I won a contest and to click a link,
but that's the time any prudent person would close their browser.

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/08/new-york-times-paywall/

Did I actually see some news in the Tulsa World today that made National news?

Did anybody here catch THAT Coburn story?....Oh my!

No

Must be referring to
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=336&articleid=20110818_16_A14_CUTLIN497125

Nutshell:  He's predicting doom n gloom

I thought Teatown was referring to the one about Coburn saying "It's a good thing I can't pack a gun on the Senate floor."

Classy Coburn, real classy...

EDIT: the link above does mention this

It's called mock horror and lacking a sense of humor.

The TW story made all the DC rounds and politalk shows yesterday.

Kudos TW.

The newspaper industry is declining faster than any other industry in the United States, according to a report released last week from the Council of Economic Advisers. The best papers in the country are bleeding red; skilled editors, reporters, photographers and ad people are being let go to balance the books and please creditors.

So what? Well, as millions of people grow suspicious of government on one side, or Wall Street on the other, the news media is about the only place left that can consistently hold institutions accountable. You don't have a news business without people to gather it.

As the paper side collapses it's taking the news side with it.

What happened?

The loss of classifieds to the Internet, an investment community that played these institutions like poker chips and left choking debt in the wake, owners without an honest commitment to independent news in a democratic society, and newspapers themselves that were slow as readers flocked to the Web.

The days are long gone when all content can be locked behind a pay wall, as much as some wish. That doesn't mean news has to be free even if it is freely available. Licensing of content still makes sense. Limited pay wall models, like The Times', clearly show promise.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/20/opinion/barth-newspapers-decline/index.html

And then there's this:

Janet Robinson, the New York Times Co. chief executive officer who was pushed out in December, received an exit package, including stock options and retirement benefits, of $23.7 million....which costs Times Co. more than the company earned in the past four years...Times Co. (NYT) stock plunged more than 80 percent during Robinson’s tenure as CEO, which began in December 2004.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-09/new-york-times-s-robinson-s-exit-package-tops-23-million (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-09/new-york-times-s-robinson-s-exit-package-tops-23-million)

Good riddance to an industry that made itself irrelevant.

The only benefit I can think of for newsprint is to use for packaging the stuff I sell on eBay.

Im not prone to rush to the Whirled's defense, but lets be realistic about one thing: 
Broadcasters just wont touch a lot of legitimate news stories until after the paper breaks the ice.

For instance, what would we have known about the Feds investigating our PD if it were entirely left to broadcast "crime reporters" reluctant to ask embarrassing questions for fear of cutting off the flow of sound bites (or missing out on the chance to look "hot" in a raid jacket).

Despite the interwebs crossovers, print and broadcast journalism are still two different animals, and we would be all the worse for it if we had only one to choose from.

...
The news papers are the last frontier that stands as a guard against political greed and corruption of our political system. 
Those reporting the news off times place the reporter’s own safety in jeopardy.  They have caused several investigation that would not have happened were it not their employers struggling to keep this age old source of informing the public.. 
The public officials that derive their self-imposed salaries and perks, at the cost of the working poor have in the news paper a power that can bring these inequities out in the open.
It is a balance of power that can only be use by the printed hardcopies.  Internet does not enjoy the reporting but they only use the script gathered by on scene reporters.
If the TW restructures its methods in order to continue the operation exercised by many on a freebee basis, you will see a surcharge placed on internet to compensate for gathering the news. 
Do you honestly believe that the EMSA scandal would come into the light with internet?  Out of state Grand jury investigating police corruption?  PW?  Trash?
Be honest with yourself, the TW is the first line of defense defending your promised security against the power glut regardless of the cost.
All entitles of a free government must have outside investigators but most department want the their fox looking in the hen house door.           
.

I could buy your premise of this if we weren’t talking about the Tulsa World.  The same Tulsa World whose publishers were apparently investors in Great Plains Airlines.  The same family with significant interests in F & M Bank which also seems to benefit from bond underwriting for city and county projects. 

You’d be well-served to try and find another newspaper to cite as being honest enough to ward off corruption.  In fact, throughout American history, newspaper publishers, editors, and writers have been very much for sale for the right amount of money or the right cause.

Not all of them. Enough to make movies about I'm sure. Shadows and I think similarly on this subject. Newspaper publishers are notorious for separating their lifestyle choices from their editorial pursuits. IOW, they know that they have an obligation to expose stories of abuse of power yet find no reason to disclose their own abuses. When there was more than one major newspaper per town they kept each other in check. Now, not so much. Nonetheless, it is a loss to have investigative reporters be limited to internet and electronic media. Not as reliable or professional and not willing to take chances.

The opportunity for real print journalism now lies with weeklies, tabloids and magazines. We have a couple of pretty good ones here but they don't have the power, contacts or money that decades of World domination provide.

You are correct the Lorton family has an interest in F&M Bank.  IMO, the story of how they became involved is a really cool one.  I'd butcher it, to say the least, if I tried to retell it here but it has nothing to do with the Tulsa World publishing their paper in a way that benefits the bank.  The end of the story is that as a result of many decades of friendship the Lorton's & the Davis' are inextricably tied in a way that I find very refreshing in a society that lacks loyalty.  I'm sure I'll be flamed for saying it, but how is a family like the Lorton's supposed to have friends if regardless of their actions or outcome they'll be attacked for showing favoritism?  Being in the media is one industry I'd never want to be in, you can do no right.

After scanning the morning paper and evaluating the pointing out to the public (between the lines) indicating the working poor are getting a royal screwing as the CEOs and head management are retiring taking with them the loot that Corporate-America has gathered.
In all honesty TW has served (even taking it into the court system) Freedom of Information request that very few person can afford.
The EMSA’s, CEO, in all the years of existence, never has before been challenged of his expenders, cited that the checking the information before dual billings would consume too much time. 
Still we requested under the Freedom of Information Act a copy of the mainframe tape of all of the water meter accounts. 
Cost: $80 dollar set up and furnished the tape.
It would take less time to check the name or address from this source than getting a fraudulent bill typed up but TW has a very limited source in trying to educate the public.


       
   

Tape?

You obviously don't know how the Public Works Dept at the CoT works.   ;D

We dealt with them when I worked at Bender and we were the ones printing their water bills.  I thought we were behind the times up there, but they were terrible.

...
The city seems of outsource their records to another department to circumvent the FOI.
The FOI requires you to furnish a tape and they are required of put the information requested on your tape.   Since it is outsourced they can charge a search charge. 
These the search consists of taking the tape about 20 inches in diameter and ½ wide and cost from $15 to $30 dollars each from a book case and putting it in a main frame copier and push the button.  It discourages the average citizen from requesting hard copies which was .25 cents each.
Can you see internet going this route in order to furnish free information?
   

What?  Doesn't matter if it's outsourced or not, they can still charge a search charge.  Internet, tape, floppy, stone tablet, whatever...  wow.

...
The original intent of the statue was that any fee charged could not be used  that would restrict the average citizen from exercising their right to be informed.  (as informed by a district judge as we walked down the hall in state capital)
He advised that the Open Records and Freedom of Information were separate acts. 

Now Tulsa World has restricted comment posts to only subscribers.

That may actually improve the comments!

Has it made a big difference on comments?  (unable to see them)

No idea, I only occasionally read TW articles, and haven't been back over there since that one, though it did seem to be really limited on posts.

The Owasso Reporter is now behind a paywall too.  I'd assume that all the Neighbor News community papers are similar.  Given their tiny markets, I can't see how this will add to their subscriber base.  I thought it was the advertisers who really paid the bills, and they want as many eyes as possible on those ads.

Also, the New York Times has reduced the number of free articles to 10.  Previously, it was 20.  Apparently they're now modeling the paper on the Tulsa World!

Tulsa World drops paywall for pandemic information:

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/we-are-dropping-the-paywall-on-coronavirus-news-stories/article_3b0355e1-1754-5a62-9204-2a06b9090a9d.html