The paywall paywalls the paywall story
Welcome to irony corner.
Today marks the launch of the SMH’s paywall in Australia. And one keen reader has already used up their allotted free views for the month.
So they can’t read about the launch of the paywall. Because it’s behind the paywall.
Fairfax: We need to go deeper.
Simple paywall work-arounds:
Haven’t checked yet, but Wirlpool forums claim the articles-read counter is cookie based – so just delete your cookies if you hit the limit and away you go again. (This is also good online security/hygiene. Consider setting your browser to delete all cookies on closing even if you never read a Fairfax yarn or if none of the above makes sense, have a geek set it for you.)
If that doesn’t work, download yourself a TOR browser from https://www.torproject.org/ – and away you go. If you hit the limit, use the little button to refresh your IP address.
Fairfax will be trying to harvest data on you whatever you do (to sell), so either or both methods are commons sense – even if you’re just interested in maintaining your privacy.
And looks like someone’s been reading Nudge or Predictably Irrational or similar. The (pointless) middle option makes the last option seem like a good deal…well, ok a better deal. In fact one of ‘those’ books quotes almost this exact example (from the NY Times I think)
Just reset your cookies.
smashing the paywall, like a boss!
Either have a paywall or don’t have one, but to have one of these ridiculous metred paywalls that is easier to circumvent than pay for (same for The Oz, NY Times, News Ltd Tabloids) is totally pointless.
Hey Ex-Reader and Cookie Monster – thanks for helping to put another journo out of work. Who else do you steal from?
instead of “why are you ‘stealing’ content?”, why not ask
“what can we do to entice customers to pay for our product?”
Because if the SMH is going to keep running articles from Peter Costello, they aren’t going to see a cent from me.
“should we improve our content before putting the paywall up?”
“of course not, run the same old stuff and expect users to pay for it”.
Like it or not, free news in Australia has set the expectation that the content level that is provided now will be provided free. Either improve it, or don’t be surprised when no one pays for it.
@WTF
Steal? What was stolen? All we’re suggesting is people do something to their own computer within the confines of a system that allows it.
Next you’ll be advocating for https://adblockplus.org/en/firefox to be made illegal 😉
“Because if the SMH is going to keep running articles from Peter Costello, they aren’t going to see a cent from me.”
They’ve clearly already stopped getting hits from you, as Costello’s regular columnist gig finished months ago.
I’m a little sad – $300 p/a is not to be sneezed at. On the flip side, I’ll probably be more productive on my journey into work now..
@WillBeProsecuted, I haven’t clicked on to the SMH since The Guardian showed up. Or for a while before then, it seems.
As an ex-broadcast journo I feel for the media. Genuinely feels like they are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
The Guardian = Free. Run by a trust, loses millions every year.
The paywalled media = Not free. Readers don’t see value, you could spend millions more improving the product but hard to see people having the propensity to pay.
At the end of the day I can’t see a model that will genuinely pay what it costs for proper high-end journalism. And unless someone does our Internet will be full of Buzzfeed lists and the ‘fast-food news’ served up by the commercial TV networks & their PI hungry digital arms.
The ABC & SBS have an opportunity to shine but the long, deep investigative pieces that are the domain of ‘dead-tree journalism’ are going to struggle for existence.
This is why I moved into sport…
I agree with the concept of paying for something I value however I’m confused with their pricing model:
$25 per month for “All Digital including website and Tablet or
$25 per month for All Digital including website and Tablet and Weekend Newspapers
I don’t want the Newspapers but its the same cost as digital. I appreciate they’re looking to keep their newspaper circulation up especially for weekend advertisers but they’ve lost me as a digital subscriber because i’m not going to pay the same as someone who wants the weekend papers when I don’t want them.
Surely I’m saving them distribution costs etc.
‘I Wonder’ – why does it matter if the newspaper is being thrown in. Can’t you value something without having to analyse the cost/resource inputs?
$25 for news access across digital/tablet is either a good deal or a bad one, regardless of whether there’s another option that includes a printed newspaper for the same cost.
Surely you can determine the value of something without having to look at what it cost to produce.
Well I think if you want to have exclusive content you can pay for it, otherwise the net will offer other localised content for free. Up to the individual. (P.S if you work in Media its a TAX deduction anyways.)
@Shamma and @I wonder and @ABC
If the newspaper is being thrown in for free, then it doesn’t count as a paid copy towards audit does it?
It’s a free copy given away.
Seems like if you do get locked out of SMH then you can just switch to The Age which has a separate paywall but same content, then go to National News and read Sydney’s.
Cannot read this:
SMH – ‘Too expensive’ Sydney slips from top 10 tourism list
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/t.....2pdh4.html
But can read this:
The Age – ‘Too expensive’ Sydney slips from top 10 tourism list
http://www.theage.com.au/trave.....2pdh4.html
I don’t know if it’s because I’m on a VPN or not but I haven’t seen the paywall and I’ve read way more than 40 stories. I’ve been actively trying to hit it. I’m assuming changing browsers or Chromes incognito mode will fix it as well.
Good point Billy C – if you’re in incognito mode on Chrome then you don’t get pay walled.
The concept of paying for widely available news is absurd. Thinking a feeble paywall will help only reinforces the notion that those behind the introduction have a very limited grasp on reality. The SMH folks must think they either have exclusivity over major news or are a top tier provider and we already know neither of those points are valid. Quite comical really but the big cheeses down at Fairfax might not realise that, they are new to this planet after all.