Displaced Rocky Mtn. News Reporters to Lanch Online Subscription Site

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 06:47:17 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

When the Rocky Mountain News went under, many of the reporters who were left without a job banded together online at I Want My Rocky and kept reporting.

Today they held a press conference. They have some capital (from three Denver entrepreneurs) and will launch an online paper May 4, provided they get 50,000 paying subscribers by April 23.

The proposed publication would be called InDenverTimes.com. Subscriptions will be available on a tiered-rate system, with 12-month subscriptions priced at $4.99 a month, six months for $5.99 a month and three months for $6.99 a month.

News will be free to all, but the other features will require a subscription. [More...]

What are the other features? "News analysis, insight, online chats and other features."

Can this model succeed?

I have been reading I Want My Rocky every day since the the paper folded. It was really a good looking site, color-wise (red, black and white), font-wise and layout-wise. Since they've decided on the venture, both I Want My Rocky and InDenver Times (not exactly a catchy name) have changed their look and gotten rid of the eye-catching red. They just aren't inviting or exciting. I hope they spend some of their new capital on some good web designers.

The New York Times fell on its face when it charged for the opinion pages. I prefer Salon's model where you get to read for free if you watch a high-tech, usually interesting ad for a few seconds, but I guess you need advertisers to be able to do that.

I think in order to sell a subscription publication these days, particularly online, you have to offer something readers can't get elsewhere. News alone won't cut it. And I don't think people will pay for online chats. Not to mention, every local news station has reporters writing articles these days, all available for free, with video.

On the other hand, The Wall St. Journal charges a pretty buck (aside from providing free access to a handful of articles each day) and it seems to be doing well.

I'd like to see InDenver Times succeed. I think it should have waited and done more research on whether a Salon or HuffPo model would have worked -- or studied the WSJ to see what makes the subscription model work for them.

My advice to them for now: Contact Henry Copeland and Blogads ... they could get some revenue rolling for the site pretty quickly. Go heavy on sports analysis, Denver is such a big sports town. And bring back the red, white and black and make the font friendlier.

< Monday Afternoon Open Thread | Former SLA Member Sara Jane Olson to Leave Prison >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Displaced Rocky Mtn. News Reporters to Lanch Online Subscription Site | 12 comments (12 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

There's a high demand for (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by Inspector Gadget on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 07:33:55 PM EST

true investigative reporting that isn't currently available.

I think in order to sell a subscription publication these days, particularly online, you have to offer something readers can't get elsewhere. News alone won't cut it.

I'm hoping the journalists for the Seattle PI will do the same thing as the Denver group did. Away from big money, corporate owners, we might see a return to real news reporting. I'd subscribe.

I am paying $13.95/month (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by caseyOR on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 07:46:38 PM EST

to have the Oregonian delivered to my door (well, in the direction of my door). And the Oregonian is a terrible paper that just gets worse as the cost goes up. As much as I love the tactile experience of reading a real paper, I would gladly pay for an online paper that provided serious, investigative news.

Just another news site? Or something of value? (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by jerry on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 07:56:57 PM EST

Who needs just another news site? Who needs more online chat? If they plan on offering the same old same old, well, whatever.

I think if they want a chance to succeed with their audience they actually have to respect and interact with their audience, which is not something journalists do well with.

Most of the sites I've seen are either:
a) no comments
b) comments but no interaction from the journalists
c) occasional limited chats with journalists or ombudsman that mainly serve to explain why the journalist is correct and the audience are stupid for not realizing that.

Now, if a site would like my money, they will offer me something of actual value, a group of journalists willing to listen and interact, not just willing to talk at me.

The HuffPo is particularly a bad example of providing people who will talk at me and otherwise disrespect me.

Salon is horrible too with the exception of Glenn Greenwald who breaks the rules in part because he doesn't have the journalism degree that comes with the understanding and arrogance and fear of the reader.

Provide articles. At the end of each article include comments with some form of moderation system and a guarantee that the journalist will read the comments and spend some percentage of his time responding.

Provide other forums in which members can discuss the site itself and the articles that appear. Guarantee that the paper's editors and journalists will take these forums seriously.

Provide more feedback and control to readers. Actually respect them. Now that would be new and of value.

About two months ago on TOTN, I asked the new head of NPR when the last time her stations had listener/community forums to discuss the local stations and NPR's offerings. She thought that was a great idea!!! But then dismissed it as something that the listeners could implement. That is, NPR central was so uninterested that she couldn't even think of suggesting that station managers should hold listener feedback forums. She put that onus on the listeners to create. Which is one more way in which NPR became part of the problem.

Interesting ideas (none / 0) (#7)
by Inspector Gadget on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 08:10:04 PM EST

I'd prefer journalists who spend a great deal of their time investigating and finding the news that isn't being reported by the controlled news media. Most journalists provide their email address in their byline and my experience is they read and respond.

What's going on right now in the country could use some serious investigative reporters digging around and exposing what isn't being made public. I am okay if they don't take time out to chat with me.


: It's part of a feedback loop (none / 0) (#8)
by jerry on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 08:26:30 PM EST

Right now journalists have no real feedback about the quality of their work except for from their bosses, and very little from the consumer. That's not a great recipe for either well-received reporting or reporting considered of value except for in the long term. And in the long term the papers are dying and so is reporting.
I'd prefer the reporters spend a lot of their time investigating, but they do need the feedback.
Think of all the value and knowledge that is provided in the critiques and analysis from Glenn Greenwald, Marcy Wheeler, Jeralyn, and many others left AND right.
* Analysis and explanation of legal or scientific matters,
* Links to more information and other issues to explore
* Discussion of history or background
* Nuance that is lost on a reporter new to an issue
And moral support too. Think of how important it that can be for a reporter in the face of objections from management or other outside entities.
I am not sure by what you mean by most reporters have their email addresses. My local paper, serving the 5th biggest city in the US does not have any email addresses. And regardless of the comments discussing the cases, the reporters NEVER respond in any fashion. It's strictly a one-way operation. I sure hope that fails.
But an email address is not enough. It lacks transparency and it is too difficult. Visible threads are what add value. I amy not want a reporter spending hours reading and answering emails, but I would have loved a reporter who came to TL to read and interact about the Duke Case, or to discuss Judith Miller, or AIG. As I said, it would be nice to see a newsite that respected its readers and understood that collectively they knew a lot that the reporter could use.

I'll sign up (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by sj on Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 10:40:10 AM EST

If they do actual investigative reporting instead of stenography, I'll renew.

: Remember the college journalism students (none / 0) (#12)
by Inspector Gadget on Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 11:05:32 AM EST

during the election who investigated and reported on voter fraud in the midwest?? There are probably plenty of journalists and students of journalism who would love to search out their own stories and print what they find rather than be directed to follow instructions that are based in someone's political agenda.

So they're going with a Times Select model (none / 0) (#1)
by andgarden on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 06:51:14 PM EST

I think Times editors have said that they made a decent profit off of the program, but never as much as they did or do through advertising (online).

Of course, for a small publication, the situation is likely to be different.

Bad Idea, IMO (none / 0) (#2)
by squeaky on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 06:54:56 PM EST

A better model would to continue to attract readers which increases the chances of ad revenue, and have fundraisers a few times a year.

Good people... (none / 0) (#3)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 07:05:29 PM EST

...good talent. I wish them all the best.

salon's model (none / 0) (#9)
by jharp on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 08:32:04 PM EST

"I prefer Salon's model where you get to read for free if you watch a high-tech, usually interesting ad for a few seconds"

I 100% agree and wonder why no one else does it.

I even believe talkleft.com could do it.

: I like Salon's model too, but on the opposite side (none / 0) (#10)
by ruffian on Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 01:13:49 AM EST

I've subscribed to Salon Premium since they started, both to get rid of the ads and just to support the site since I wanted it to succeed. I would gladly do that with other sites I use daily.
I looked at the Rocky site when they first started it and thought it was a great idea. If I still lived there wanted local features and news I would definitely sign up. I might anyway, just to keep up with Colorado.