Notice: All forums will be retired as of May 31st, 2016 and will not be archived. Thank you for your participation in this community, and we hope you continue to enjoy other content at

Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from AppDev. Show AppDev's posts

    Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

    The Globe now wants $208/year for basic online access to its slender news product, paid weekly. Shortly after Thanksgiving, the Globe began advertising a $50/year special offer with a single payment, available through December 31. [ At ]

    Some readers who balked at $208/year for the online Globe may be interested at this more reasonable rate. The special rate puts the online Globe more nearly in line with the online news market, considering the extent of unique news that the online Globe provides.

    Most readers who might be interested will also be considering or already paying for basic online access to the NY Times at $195/year, the Wall Street Journal at $104/year, the Economist at $110/year or the Boston Business Journal at $59/year.

    The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Guardian, Le Monde, and many sites with wire service articles remain available without fees.

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from topaz978. Show topaz978's posts

    Re: Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

    Such a deal for recycled content availible free elsewhere. Oh except for the local politically correct cast on the news. Thats pure botown. The globe used to have a really decent science page about 4 years ago. But now I read more from Science News and Science. At least there I get what I pay for. It is sad that a science journal of peer reviewed articles cost 125 per year and the poor general republishing of wire stories costs so much more.
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from AppDev. Show AppDev's posts

    "Local color" in the Globe

    What the Globe had a few years ago was not really so much of a "science page" but Gareth Cook and, for a short while, Bill Dedman, with fill-ins from an occasional freelancer and a few other other reporters. Mr. Dedman has gone to MSNBC. Mr. Cook is lately called a "columnist" and gets in about one short article a week.

    The Globe still has Carolyn Johnson, who jumped to Business after Science was finally junked last summer and manages to place an occasional piece in White Coat Notes, and Hiawatha Bray, for whom "technology" has shrunk to little more than consumer gadgets.

    For many years, the Globe has tried reporting on energy, health care, science, transportation, technology and environment as "local color"--in about a 20-mile radius. When the ship sails, the Globe disconnects. Mr. Cook is apparently the only Globe reporter allowed to make an out-of-state phone call.

    The Globe had opportunities during the tenure of its all-time champion editor, Thomas Winship, 1965-1984. He built out a scattershot local news staff into national and some international reporting, but he seemed mostly interested in politics and appeared to care little about anything else.

    Boston's second surge of technology took off then. Whether or not they agreed with its outlooks, the Globe had the attention of most involved, after the sagging Herald-Journal-Advertiser-Traveler was taken over by Hearst in 1972, moshed with Record-American and morphed into a daily police gazette. The Globe missed the boat.

  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from topaz978. Show topaz978's posts

    Re: Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

    Actually you are wrong. The bonews printed the science page word for word(mostly) from the NYT, I read both at the time, the articles are identicle. I have only been exposed to the globe since 1976 so you have reported a longer history.
    The lack of coverage area is dead on.
     It is bad enough that since the digital transition that I cannot recieve boston tv, I exist outside the magical limit for satellite local news. If the state of mass declared an emergency I would have to find out from another state. Actually if my spanish was better I might understand the news from a worchester station which is my only over the air digital tv at all.
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

    I suggest that has not yet found its sweet spot on the very elastic curve it rides. And with respect for the OP, I believe that this elasticity is more immediate than substitution by the NY Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Economist, and the Boston Business Journal.  Take "immediate" to mean proximate - content, geography - and timely.  Except perhaps as to weekend/Sunday editions.

    And, AppDev, this thread, more than others before it, makes me ache to ask, did you ever work at the Globe?  If this question isn't general enough, never mind. 
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from msobstinate99. Show msobstinate99's posts

    Re: Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

    I wonder how well the sales are going? I refuse to pay for online news. Most of it is recycled, or not worth reading. I can't imagine the Globe is making money off of this? I too wonder if AppDev works for the Globe, or one of its advertisers.
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from AppDev. Show AppDev's posts

    $50 too much? How about $25?

    Just recently, the Globe started another promotion: 6 months for $25. [ At ]

    No one from our household or among our friends ever worked at the Globe, but we did subscribe to that newspaper and others for over forty years, until Internet-based news services became strong enough to replace paper news entirely several years ago. So we do remember several eras in the development of the Globe and many of today's and yesterday's news staff. Nowadays, the Globe resembles those early 1900s firms still trying to sell buggy-whips, when people were starting to drive automobiles.

    Like other metropolitan news media fallen on hard times, the Globe has tried to shore up its flagging news capacity with columnists, who cost less to support than reporters. Having plenty of opinions ourselves, over all those years we never read any of their editorials or columns and likewise rarely read any of their features: sports, food, arts, travel, entertainment, house or most of the current grab-bag of "lifestyle."

    To us, the reporters come across as individuals, with distinct talents, blind spots and biases. We miss many of the perceptive and occasionally funny reporters who were pushed overboard, as the crowd of yahoos who manage the business side of the paper stumbled, fumbled and bumbled their ways through massive deficits during the past 15 years. Before then, there were several lost opportunities to build committed readers, leveraging strong trends in the Boston area, but aside from some narrow-minded, badly staffed ventures at reporting health care, none were seriously pursued.

  8. This post has been removed.

  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

    AppDev, thank you.  The question was without cynicism.  Thanks for the trust.  A long view, indeed.  (I wondered if Mr. Nolan were back, or a retired editor.  From behind these eyes, it was a respectful hunch.) 

    I submit that it already would be a material loss to the forums' discourse if you were to bow out.
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from AppDev. Show AppDev's posts

    Subscription games

    Some years ago, neighbors of ours used to make a sport out of maintaining a Globe subscription through a chain of special promotions. The going rate for promotions was usually about half the normal subscription rate, just like the "new subscriber" Globe home delivery special now available. Soon after a promotional subscription lapsed, a new promotional offer would appear in the mail.

    An old rule of thumb for newspaper pricing was advertising revenue paying to generate a newspaper's content and subscription revenue paying to print and deliver the paper. By that model, the costs of printing and delivery have become high, with 7-day home delivery to Boston and inner suburbs now regularly at $382 per year for the Herald, $374 for the WSJ (6 days), $637 for the Globe and $770 for the NY Times.

    In the age of Internet, the traditional pricing model is not being upheld, with online subscribers tapped for part of the cost of content. As some other strictly local newspapers still do, for a few years the Sacramento Bee and West Hawaii Today operated with closed sites and moderately priced online subscriptions. Now both have gone back to open sites, but offering partial content, charging fees for full-replica online delivery. Time Magazine launched such an approach this summer, only bundled with print. [ at ]

    Currently complicating these trends is Apple's attempt to grab subscription revenue through the perpetual royalties being charged to content distributors using its proprietary software. Historically, attempts to capture unrelated business through proprietary interfaces have failed (e.g., Wang, DEC, Next), keeping Intel as the major provider of computer processors and Microsoft as the major provider of operating systems.

  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Globe Online special $50/year, not $208

    It's probably not news, but to badly mix metaphors:  The advertising industry is the 800 lb. gorilla in the room; it is the dog, the media is the tail.  This is the milieu.