Posted on 08/05/2009 3:03:12 PM PDT by markedmannerf
FoxNews likes graphics.
They spatter them all over the TV screen. I recently got HD cable. The FoxNews HD channel has graphics top, bottom, left and right. FoxNews actually looks better on the old SD TV. FoxBusiness HD is even worse with graphics all over it.
They spatter graphics all over their web pages. Even on highspeed cable, it takes forever for the FoxNews/FoxNation websites to load.
I can't get videos from FoxNews to load most of the time.
Charge for it?
“If the market will bear an access charge, in addition to ads, he’ll make money. If it doesn’t, he won’t, and it will be short-lived. I applaud the shameless pursuit of cash.”
And apparently the shameless pursuit of lawsuits. Because you can bet the farm that there will be plenty of those by him when bloogers/writers quote “his” news stories.
I won’t be reading it either.
It will likely severely shrink their readership therefore reducing the rates they can charge for advertising. It is an experiment but not a new one. Such tests have ended negatively before. Why does Murdoch think the same experiment will end differently this time?
So, Murdoch wants people to pay to read about the latest Hollywood celebrity scandal or dead white girl investigation?
Good luck with that Rupert, I don’t listen to your cable network anymore because the content is so crappy.
“It is my only access to conservative English language talk radio”
many radio stations are webcast live and/or later rebroadcasts of almost any conservative talker you could wish for
Screw you Murdoch, FoxNews.Com hasn’t GOT anything worth charging for!
No big deal. I never go to the Fox News website anyway, and after their coverage of this last election, I rarely watch Fox News on cable anymore.
lol, lol, yep that’s gonna work, lol
I don’t read FoxNews.com very much because I hate the layout. So it will be no big loss to me. I won’t pay for it.
This stupid tactic won’t last long.
AMF!
Very very stupid move.
I agree, they have a terrible website.
Yep that will work...snork! LOL
Wrong economy Rupert......get a clue.
>> That site is awful anyway. It’s not worth the hassle even when it’s free.
How can you say that!!?! I don’t think I could do without Foxnews.com for even ONE day!
My favorite feature is the 60% space they devote to stories of general interest — of course, I’m speaking of Skanky Celebrity Gossip! Where ELSE would I find the exact number of scabs that Lindsey Lohan picked off of her methamphetimine-ravaged limbs??? I mean, like HOW could you POSSIBLY show up at a COCKTAIL PARTY or RAVE and NOT KNOW THAT???
My next most favoritest feature is the ads! Heck, I don’t even mind waiting those few extra minutes while they load!
Murdoch is a legend in his own mind. People will not pay for access to his sites, especially when others continue to provide it for free. Any idiot can read several sources and draw his/her conclusions. Fox News is not the end all.
I trust this is what’s called a trial balloon. Because if he actually does it, his hit-meter is gonna flatline overnight, and his advertisers will have his head on a pike. Sadly, although it’s my browser’s home page, FoxNews.com is kinda useless nowadays— half of it is celebrity crapola, anyway. Gossip about people I couldn’t care less about and often actively detest.
It’s entirely possible that Rupert doesn’t quite get this intertubes thing. If he starts charging me actual cash money, I’ll find some other place to browse. It’ll take maybe two heartbeats, with no looking back. And my name is Legion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.