I guess it is ,like all other things--like bank cards and ATMs they lure you into using them--and then hit you with the fees--not that I ever use an ATM--I go to the bank counter---I have given up buying the paper as they are full of Celb' rubish and I can see the same on the news

Unless the ABC starts charging it wont really bother me - as I find that they have most of the same news as the Murdoch papers and our local is not owned by Murdoch one of the few!



Herald sun is and Andrew Bolts blog is one I do read and his blog has many saying will not pay either.



I actually think it is what they deserve the papers for charging so much when they are or have been making billions on adverts - could have given it away or kept the cost right down to sell more papers - but no greed won and now it is losing out to Internet which is mainly free and all they can think of is how to get money off of us.



The other good RSS fed is BBC News which will also remain free I reckon seeing as taxpayers fund it like ABC and it has also picked up all the news often from here but from the world so get that feed too.

Looks as thogh the ABC won't be charging, according to an article to-day.

Interestingly, there is now talk of two levels...one free access and the other chargeable.

I can understand why there would be a need for fees. Wages still have to be paid, and there are the ongoing costs of newsgathering, as there are in other fields.

However, one would hope that the quality of the reporting would be worth it.



News Ltd, publisher of The Herald Sun and The Australian, plans to introduce online charges by June next year. Fairfax has not set a date.



The move is a risk for both publishers, which are gambling on readers being prepared to pay for news they have been receiving free - and will remain free on sources such as the ABC.



[url=http://www.theage.com.au/national/fairfax-news-to-charge-for-online-20090808-edm3.html]Link[/url]

There is absolutely no way I would pay for any news! Earth-shattering news reach us anyway, and there are countless sources we can access the news. I don't buy magazines because I am sick of advertisements, cooking tips, diets and celebrities anyway - same applies to most newspapers ....

Many of us "senior citizens" will recall when news actually was NEWS. These days, it is someones opinion of the news, or an "interpretation" of events......so much of what is supposed to be news is actually just commentary.

I watch TV news, mainly for the entertainment value, but when I want straight factual reporting, I look at BBC News on the net. Its still far from perfect, but certainly better than the sensationalised and opinionated news we get on local and U.S. channels. I doubt we will ever have to pay for the BBC and in my humble opinion, its quality is first rate.

Many of us "senior citizens" will recall when news actually was NEWS. These days, it is someones opinion of the news, or an "interpretation" of events......so much of what is supposed to be news is actually just commentary.

I watch TV news, mainly for the entertainment value, but when I want straight factual reporting, I look at BBC News on the net. Its still far from perfect, but certainly better than the sensationalised and opinionated news we get on local and U.S. channels. I doubt we will ever have to pay for the BBC and in my humble opinion, its quality is first rate.



How very true that comment about opinions is:(



Every night someone here says we don't care what you think dear - just read the news please!



Also of course they are completely a bad example to the children as they have a limited vocabulary and mispronounce far too many words and as for vowels - mangle them - 'amagin' 'invironment' etc oh and 'battul' 'hospitul' 'littul' and so on.........



So BBC is fine - sounds like Australians of old - well spoken and informing us of the news - not their version of it.



Love to hear old Aussie newscasts to hear the good grammar, extended vocabulary and wonderful pronunciation we have lost with the pc years and the way we are into everyone else's business - have we all become sticky beaks - seems so to me!



We have most definitely gone backwards in many things.

Is it any wonder that poor old Rupert wants to charge for his online news content.



It is absolutely pathetic the way that the newspapers have ended up in this day and age. The news that is contained within the many sheets is abysmal and the advertising is an insult to the purchasers of these "rags".



The Newspaper moguls only have themselves to blame for very poor content and it is scandalous the number of trees that are sacrificed to meet this declining appetite for this moronic standard of literary rubbish.



Go ahead Rupert,.....I for one will NOT be paying for your online rubbish,.....after all there is enough rubbish on the Internet now!

Rupert reckons "Quality journalism is not cheap"

That's probably why we haven't seen a lot from him lately.

Just another money grab by the Mega-rich. You'd be dumb to pay for Rupert's spin on world events.

Cheers,

Dan

Much of the news can't be relied upon for accuracy. The media so often exaggerates stories for public consumption. Just see a programme about the paparazzi.



If I want to pay for news I will buy a newspaper which I do on Sundays for the weekly TV guide. However, I am sick of seeing the paper full of photos of young females, fashion and guides on how to look younger etc. Can't we be proud of our age and having grey hair.

I have even given up buying the Sunday paper --that I used to get for the TV guide--as I get it all on the TV now--and the paper is so full of rubbish it is not worth buying

Maybe Rupert could do us all a favour and print his "rags" in rolls containing around 500 sheets and perforations which would allow us to partake of his NEWS content in the appropriate place in the house and once read use for nature`s final solution.



I found that I was buying the Sunday Mail every Sunday basically for the TV programme guide, but then found that generally the guide was around 50% correct and 50% calculated guess. What made me "bleed " was the fact that I had to pay through the nose to get it delivered,... ( thrown out of a vehicle travelling at close to the speed of sound with the result that the very gravel bruised circular plastic wrapped package could be found anywhere within a 100 metres of the driveway, and would then entail a very frustrating game called " find the end of the plastic wrap!"



On many many occasions I would track from page to page before finding anything of interest, around the 23rd page or so, before finding anything worthwhile reading!



I used to suscribe to "Letters to the Editor" but found that invariably my offerings were modified, altered format or words changed to totally alter the whole context of the message. When complaining to the Editor I was told that " The Editor reserves the right to EDIT any letter he sees fit!". A further complaint to the National Press Council came back with the inevitable and identical reply,.......so I just don`t bother anymore!.......DEMOCRACY at work?

You are on the internet so why buy a paper anyway - can get it daily and it is more accurate for FTA analogue and digital has its own guide anyway.