Ask dotTechies: Would you pay to visit your favorite website, and if so, how much?
December 25, 2009 33
Email article | Print article 
3-4 months ago the Internet was buzzing with the news that News Corp, a media publication company which owns and operates many popular Internet destinations like The Wall Street Journal, would start charging for the content on its online properties by 2010. Many people were up in arms, some predicating the down fall of News Corp. I am curious to see what dotTechies think of the matter. Think about your favorite website. It can be any type of website: a news website, a blog, a forum, etc. If that website decided to start charging a subscription fee, would you pay it?
[poll id="11"]
Don’t worry. dotTech will never barricade itself behind a subscription wall inshAllah. I am just curious as to what people think. Personally, I can’t see myself paying a subscription for any website at the moment.
I do not see the option I want so I will not vote. I do pay for the Windows Secrets newsletter which is pay what you think it is worth. To me it helps me in my system administration and I pay $20 per year which is what it is worth to me. More than that and I would have to think about it. Anyway that is my 2 cents worth…
I don’t need the internet but enjoy using it as part of my computing hobby. That ‘hobby’ is already expensive enough with having to upgrade my computer and operating system every few years and also ISP charges. If it became common to have to pay to access websites I think I would just give such websites a miss.
I have noticed that many sites that focus on education offer much more content to those who subscribe, which I understand, but generally I feel that at present it is unnecessary to subscribe unless one desires specific content that is otherwise unavailable.
You should seek royalties from ISP. They are stealing your information and selling to consumer. I think $0.25 per page would be fine with everyone.
I agree with Fred Smith, I think if the web became a place where you have to pay for most content then it will.. die and we will find other hobbies.
I wouldn’t pay a cent. It’s already enough that we pay for our computers and Internet access. Plus I am only 15,do you think my dad will pay 20$ monthly for me to visit a website (exept for DotTech..it rocks =P), he just bought me a laptop… I say: if your favourite website requires you to pay for it, than it shouldn’t be your favourite website. Are you people with me?
I’m such a jerk–I can’t afford to pay anything, lol.
This is a GREAT site and I just love visiting here and enjoy a few other sites as well but I too could not afford to pay a fee. If I could I probably would.
Vidimo Se!
Subscription, no.
Donation, definitely.
I’m a happy dot.tech donor and a long-time donor to Windows Secrets (from back in the days when it was the Langa List, and the eponymous Fred was single-handedly producing the very best tech info on the ‘Net — and managing to raise money for kids in Third World countries at the same time.)
The subscription model is 99% unworkable: it’s the World Wide Web out there, not some tiny alley, and that world is so full of information — which changes on a minute-by-minute basis — that it’s impossible for a single, non-specialist subscription service to claim to have the key to a store of absolutely unique knowledge.
However: I did say, “99% unworkable” (as per Murdoch’s ludicrous model.)
There’ll always be a 1% where subscription is fully justified, because the information provided has come at a considrable cost to the provider.
Thus in the UK, for example, providers of ‘family tree’ data (and especially, census records and births/deaths/marriages registrations) have to pay Government a substantial amount in licence fees — and so are entitled, in my view, to charge end users a one-off fee or subscription to access that historic data.
Other specialist websites with archives of historically valuable information also deserve to be subscription-based.
But as for general purpose sites like newspapers charging access, I really can’t see the point in paying to look at the back issues of Mr Murdoch’s Sun, notwithstanding the vast amount of intellectual content just waiting to be harvested there. . .