Earlier this month, following (as usual?) the NYT, WaPo’s metered paywall went up. Now you get just 20 free articles before having to pay a minimum of $9.99 a month.
While this approach is working well for NYT and even now-independent blogger Andrew Sullivan, one does wonder what will happen when the entire media old guard is walled away. Will the average news consumer consider it something worth paying for, or will still free, less-established sources become the go-to and the vanguard?
Personally, WaPo’s paywall has not yet been much of a problem as we try to avoid the technological deathtrap any more than is necessary. But, it does seem seem some normal folks out there are starting to run up against it. We’re no psychologists, but we think we’re starting to see some of the stages of grief play out in social media.
Shock and Denial:
Washington Post paywall? 20 free articles, then $9.99+ per month. When did this start? I need to get a news piggy bank…
— Henry Shull (@HenryShull) June 30, 2013
Is this bargaining?
Washington Post paywall will have the effect of me avoiding clicking WashPost links, to save my 20 free for WonkBlog — Walt Frick (@wfrick) July 2, 2013
To circumvent the Washington Post paywall, I now only access articles from the @washingtonpost twitter feed.
— Sidney Le (@sidtle) July 2, 2013
WaPo’s National Correspondent, Karen Tumulty, has already moved on to acceptance. Probably helps that WaPo cuts her paychecks:
Brave new world: Washington Post app just informed me the paywall is up.
Finally, though, we think the When In Washington Tumblr has probably dealt with the whole situation in the healthiest way possible, with this post:
- But How Does Dave Weigel Feel About the Obama-Castro Handshake?
- FBDC Web Ratings Roundup: November 2013
- FishbowlDC Newsstand: Your Morning at a Glance
- FBDC's Winners and Losers of Twitter