Boston Globe Now Subscription-Only

[mabrowndog]

They've talked about it for years, but it's finally happened.

The Boston Globe today launches a new subscription-only website, BostonGlobe.com, betting that readers will be willing to pay for an online product that offers an innovative, inviting reading experience that is the only gateway to all of the Globe's journalism.

BostonGlobe.com will combine the newspaper's print stories with breaking news on a site designed for customers who want premium content they can read on multiple devices, from computers to tablets to smartphones.

For the rest of September, BostonGlobe.com will be free, but after that readers will have to pay $3.99 a week for a digital-only subscription. Home delivery subscribers will not have to pay extra for the site but will need to register online to gain access.

The newspaper's existing site, Boston.com, will remain free and will offer breaking news, blogs, photo galleries, sports coverage, and a limited selection of stories from the paper.

Other major newspapers have also started to charge for online content as readers and advertisers continue migrating to the Internet, cutting into the print revenue that pays for a large percentage of newsgathering operations. Particularly notable has been The New York Times, which requires a subscription to gain access to more than 20 stories per month.

The strategy at the Globe, which is owned by The New York Times Co., is unique because the paper has decided to split its news brands - Boston.com and The Boston Globe - into two distinct websites.

They've also posted a FAQ page on the changes

Early on we'd heard that the Globe planned to keep all sports content free to all readers. But in comparing the sports sections today of Boston.com and BostonGlobe.com, I spotted two Patriots articles that are posted only at the latter site:

Tom Brady, Patriots chomping at the bit
Scouting the 2011 Patriots: What does this team have?

I wish the Globe well with their business model, but I don't plan to subscribe and I doubt this will have a huge effect on my ability to stay informed on the teams I follow. We've been at least a couple decades into a steady decline in the quality of sports coverage at this paper. While I might miss reading Bob Ryan or certain feature stories, I'm not exactly going to get depressed about losing access to Shank, Cafardo or Shalise Manza-Young. And considering how the Globe and other papers will continue to be revolving doors for low-wage, fresh-out-of-college journalists, the best of whom will ultimately move on to multimedia gigs, I'm even less fearful of missing anything critical.

 

[Blacken]

From a tech nerd perspective, I love the redesign (I know the folks behind it and they did a beautiful job with it), but I'm with Dog--I'm not going to subscribe, either.

(Wonder if you can Google around the paywall, like the NYT.)

 

[terrynever]

I won't pay for any newspapers on-line when the dot.coms are free and have recruited most of the best newsmen over the past five years. And that's coming from someone who has worked in newspapers for 40 years. Why pay for it?

Have to admit, I do pay for ESPN insider stuff, around $40 per year. It's worth it.

 

[mabrowndog]

From a tech nerd perspective, I love the redesign (I know the folks behind it and they did a beautiful job with it).

Ditto on this. Really nice simplified layout without a bunch of crap (animations, ads, etc.) that brings some nice visual appeal. But still not nearly enough to make me want to shell out $16 a month or $192 annually.

Were I a more avid reader of their local & state news/politics coverage, perhaps I'd see some value. But other than for huge Boston-based stories (i.e. Whitey Bulger, Big Dig problems, etc) I rarely access anything other than the Globe's sports content.

 

[Spacemans Bong]

They're charging more, only a dollar more but more, than the New York motherfuckin' Times. Srsly?

I mean, I'll pay for the Times. Maybe I'm a mug but I'm enough of a traditionalist to believe the Times is an icon. Plus I do get several good articles a day out of it. The quantity of its feature reporting is awesome.

But the Globe stinks.

 

[dirtynine]

I'll take a somewhat opposite view on the redesign - the "simpler" part is an improvement, but there isn't a unified sense of style or really any visual refinement at all. Perhaps that will come in time, and if they got the tech/content management side right then they're set up to succeed in the long term. But I think they need a visual / UI designer to polish it a bit. Right now it looks like somebody trying to copy the NYT's site from memory.

 

[pedros hairstylist]

Like the white space -- one improvement over the MBTA at rush hour style crowding going on at boston.com. But I don't like the hed fonts -- they're too compressed and thin. They make the stories feel insignificant. Ditto with the link heds, too wispy and timid.

 

[SoxScout]

I wish the Globe well with their business model, but I don't plan to subscribe and I doubt this will have a huge effect on my ability to stay informed on the teams I follow. We've been at least a couple decades into a steady decline in the quality of sports coverage at this paper. While I might miss reading Bob Ryan or certain feature stories, I'm not exactly going to get depressed about losing access to Shank, Cafardo or Shalise Manza-Young. And considering how the Globe and other papers will continue to be revolving doors for low-wage, fresh-out-of-college journalists, the best of whom will ultimately move on to multimedia gigs, I'm even less fearful of missing anything critical.

As long as Fluto keeps showing up in my Brief RSS reader, it'll be the same as since Edes and Reiss left. No reason at all to visit anymore.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Have to admit, I do pay for ESPN insider stuff, around $40 per year. It's worth it.

You're getting hosed. You can get a year's subscription to ESPN the Magazine for like $10 and be able to get access to ESPN Insider.

The only problem is that you have to explain to people that you don't read ESPN the Magazine. Honestly, I think that I would rather explain away the newest issue of Shaved Beavers Illustrated than try to tell people that I don't really read ESPN the Magazine.

 

[PBDWake]

You're getting hosed. You can get a year's subscription to ESPN the Magazine for like $10 and be able to get access to ESPN Insider.

This. Every year for the past 3, I've gotten a year subscription off an amazon magazine deal for like $8, $10, and $8.

 

[terrynever]

You're getting hosed. You can get a year's subscription to ESPN the Magazine for like $10 and be able to get access to ESPN Insider.

The only problem is that you have to explain to people that you don't read ESPN the Magazine. Honestly, I think that I would rather explain away the newest issue of Shaved Beavers Illustrated than try to tell people that I don't really read ESPN the Magazine.

My mistake. I used to pay for Insider but switched to the magazine five years ago (forgot I did that). I send my magazine to the troops overseas. Haven't seen the magazine in awhile. Don't think the content is directed to 64-year-old people.

 

[mabrowndog]

My mistake. I used to pay for Insider but switched to the magazine five years ago (forgot I did that). I send my magazine to the troops overseas. Haven't seen the magazine in awhile. Don't think the content is directed to 64-year-old people.

It's not directed at 54-, 44-, or 34-year-olds either.

Not to digress, but I don't think there's a more embarrassingly awful American periodical on any topic than ESPN The Magazine. It makes Rolling Stone look like the Atlantic Monthly.

 

[Blacken]

But I think they need a visual / UI designer to polish it a bit.

I hate to point to authoritative figures regarding subjective opinions, but this is a case where it's almost required. Filament Group, the firm that built out the new Globe site, employs Scott Jehl, one of the best frontend designers I've ever had the privilege of meeting, and hired Ethan Marcotte (the guy who popularized responsive web design--he literally wrote the book) for the project. I'm going to go with "they know what they're doing." You can quite reasonably disagree with the decisions made, but saying that this thing "lacks polish" is just plain silly.

Right now it looks like somebody trying to copy the NYT's site from memory.

If you said "they did what the NYT sucked at doing", I might agree. But copying? No way. Aside from "columns and text" the Globe site and the Times site share little in common in terms of design direction. The Globe site is a wonderful example of responsive design (resize the browser horizontally, and look at it on a smartphone if you have one handy) that is, if anything, "copying" the look of a newspaper. The NYT site may similarly be aping the look of a newspaper, but does so poorly--tiny, tiny fonts, unhelpful color usage, the oft-maligned section bar down the left side of the page, etc. etc.


I wouldn't pay for the content in the Globe, but the presentation is absolutely brilliant. This is my new go-to for "how to present a modern site without fucking up the experience for your users" (aside from the paywall, anyway).

A good read for anyone with a tech or design bent: http://www.observer.com/2011/09/adaptive-redesign-at-the-boston-globe/

 

[dirtynine]

I've listened to Ethan speak and there's no doubting his or Filament's credentials. In this case, I am comfortable saying I don't think UI design is optimized yet. I prefer, for instance, what Zeldman and Happy Cog just did with Harvard.edu. Differing (but not completely different) projects, but still, I go for more polish than what I currently see on the new Globe site. I think it is a subjective thing, and don't mean to malign the developers at all - it's certainly not broken.

edit- and as far as responsive newspaper-oriented design, I was a big fan of what the International Herald Tribune was doing as early as 5-6 years ago, with columned layouts and high readability. That site was brilliance in information design. When they got sucked into the NYT it went away, and I haven't seen any newspaper approach it yet.

 

[Blacken]

OK, cool, sounds like we're on the same page. I'm curious as to where you see a lack of polish, though it may just be differing styles--like, when I look at the Harvard website (after switching to my desktop because it looks like ass on my netbook), I see chaos. I get what they're sorta trying to do, but it's undirected; I'm not sure how it applies to a website where information, rather than "look, shiny" (which, let's face it, is the goal of a college admissions site), is the main focus.

(I am biased, though; I think Happy Cog often spends too much time trying to overwhelm my eyeballs and not enough on information presentation. Great ideas, a lot of the time, but execution...ehh. Their own website punches me in the face and leaves me confused and annoyed.)

 

[dirtynine]

Yeah, re-reading my first post, as spending a few more minutes with the Globe site, I think I was a bit too harsh. It's pretty nicely laid out, and the quality of "responsiveness" isn't something you look at and go "oooh!" - but it's the kind of it-just-works thing that definitely helps platforms feel right in the long run. Since you asked, here's one quick critique: the red "save" buttons are too prominent and cover headlines on hover. I'd mute the color and find a dedicated niche for them within each article capsule.

There's also no reason that a modern site, on a modern browser, needs to be quite as stark as the Globe (or the NYT) is/are. Very prudent use of gradients, shadows and bevels - not "I just discovered Photoshop!!", but something with monotones and restraint (see Apple, Square, etc.) mixed in to the design would really help the refinement a bit (and older platforms could fall back to the way things look at present).

Re. Harvard, this newest redesign is a big leap, especially given the sheer volume of content they have to contend with. They are very much a news-covering and news-producing organism, as well as a university. And there's still some polish to be had there, as well, I agree.

Curious - and this may be getting to inside baseball for the thread, but - did you follow the Andy Rutledge/NYT stuff this summer? The just-launched Globe layout took at least some cues from that, to my eyes. Fascinating to see his dissection of the NYT (which I thought was great in places), his rebuild (again, beautiful if a bit short-sighted) and the reaction from all corners of the design community, which was far from universally positive. (His follow-up posts threatening litigation against his critics were unfortunate, of course). His prior work with Adaptive Path on envisioning the future of the NYT's sports section (done in 2008) is also worth a read if you haven't caught it.

 

[Seabass]

This. Every year for the past 3, I've gotten a year subscription off an amazon magazine deal for like $8, $10, and $8.

Go to espn.com/thanks and re-up for a dollar a year. I've done this twice now.

 

[24JoshuaPoint]

Like someone else said if I lived in the Boston area I would probably subscribe. But the only thing i care about is their sports content which I can't reconcile for $16 bucks a month.

It would be nice though to be in that office when they flip the switch, tracking subs after something like that is pretty fascinating.

 

[E5 Yaz]

It would be nice though to be in that office when they flip the switch, tracking subs after something like that is pretty fascinating.

Substitute "depressing" for "fascinating"

 

[BobVealeFan]

Did they get rid of the Extra Bases Blog? I can't find it.

 

[mabrowndog]

Did they get rid of the Extra Bases Blog? I can't find it.

It's still on Boston.com, as are all the other team-specific blogs.

Sox page

Extra Bases

 

[dolomite133]

It's the right move but one wonders if it's too late. If papers put up pay wallls 15 years ago maybe they'd still have a greater relevance.

 

[BobVealeFan]

It's still on Boston.com, as are all the other team-specific blogs.

Sox page

Extra Bases

Oh, I didn't know Boston.com and the Globe were different. :c070: Since Boston.com doesn't seem to be by subscription and about all I read is the blogs I guess I'm good.

I'll go back to my normal lurking now, thanks.

 

[JimD]

I'll miss reading Bob Ryan - that's it. The entire print version of the Globe is a shadow of its former self.

 

[Chad Finn]

Checking in from the shadows here . . .

You can continue to read Bob, JimD. Sports isn't behind the pay wall.

 

[Curtis_Lesspanic]

Checking in from the shadows here . . .

You can continue to read Bob, JimD. Sports isn't behind the pay wall.

Can you guys hire Gresh and put him behind it?

 

[JimBoSox9]

Checking in from the shadows here . . .

You can continue to read Bob, JimD. Sports isn't behind the pay wall.

While I'm happy about this, the decision-making behind the business model is perplexing. I can get breaking local news from boston.com. The best section from the paper isn't behind the paywall. It's hard to imagine that they think the rest of the paper is worth $4/week to any except their 5% most devoted readers. The most likely outcome is that the revenue stream from subscriptions is less than or barely even with the revenue loss from suppressed click-throughs.

 

[JimD]

Checking in from the shadows here . . .

You can continue to read Bob, JimD. Sports isn't behind the pay wall.

I tried the other day and it insisted on a login. I'll try again.

 

[Chad Finn]

I tried the other day and it insisted on a login. I'll try again.

You may need a login there; not sure how it will be accessed once the pay model kicks in. It will be on Boston.com as well, though.

 

[Carmine Hose]

It seems they are wise in leaving sports outside the pay wall since there is so much free competition for that news and "insight," unlike with say local news and features.

 

[Jnai]

I tried the other day and it insisted on a login. I'll try again.

You can use bugmenot.com (and their free firefox plugin) to avoid compulsory registration on Boston.com (and a whole host of other annoying sites). This won't work for their paywalled site, but at least will prevent you from having to fill out the forms.

 

[fenwaypaul]

You can always read the print edition:

<iframe frameborder="no" width="480" height="270" scrolling="no" src="http://www.theonion.com/video_embed/?id=17572"></iframe><br /><a href="http://www.theonion.com/video/boston-globe-tailors-print-edition-for-three-remai,17572/" target="_blank" title="Boston Globe Tailors Print Edition For Three Remaining Subscribers">Boston Globe Tailors Print Edition For Three Remaining Subscribers</a>

 

[AB in DC]

It seems they are wise in leaving sports outside the pay wall since there is so much free competition for that news and "insight," unlike with say local news and features.

Don't forget, a site like boston.com gets a lot of traffic from out-of-town folks (like me) who still follow the Sox, Pats, etc but wouldn't even consider paying for Boston-centric content.

 

[soxhop411]

And now the sports blogs (extra bases/extra point etc) may be going behind the paywall..
 
Pete Abraham ‏@PeteAbe  43m
http://BostonGlobe.com  paywall has been altered. 10 free articles a month now. Soon all Globe staff content there.
 
Pete Abraham ‏@PeteAbe  23m
@SPChrisHatfield I think all the Globe staff material will be on http://BostonGlobe.com .
 
 
very bad idea IMO

 

[Blacken]

Or a fantastic idea. Who wants people sharing Shank and Peter Abraham tripe?

 

[Patriot_Reign]

yes but chad finn

 

[NortheasternPJ]

Chad is boston.com not boston globe isn't he?

 

[Patriot_Reign]

I thought I had run into some of Chad's stuff being behind the wall...I  think he occasionally does columns for the Globe.
I might be mistaken though. 

 

[thebestwas33tom]

His media notes columns are behind the paywall on Fridays. Hopefully TATB stays free.

 

[Dan to Theo to Ben]

Or a fantastic idea. Who wants people sharing Shank and Peter Abraham tripe?

I was at a local supermarket recently where some guy was "giving away" Globes tied to a sales pitch about. Fre is free so I reached out my arm, and he fishing rod'ed it and asked if I read the Globe much. I said all the sportswirters of the past aren't there anymore. He said "we have Dan [last name will not be mentioned].
 
 
Just rolled my eyes and turned around.

 

[Chad Finn]

Still sorting out my situation. Looks like TATB will remain on Boston.com. In a weird spot because I write for both.

 

[terrisus]

I was at a local supermarket recently where some guy was "giving away" Globes tied to a sales pitch about. Fre is free so I reached out my arm, and he fishing rod'ed it and asked if I read the Globe much. I said all the sportswirters of the past aren't there anymore. He said "we have Dan [last name will not be mentioned].
 
 
Just rolled my eyes and turned around.

 
Should've been like, "Get rid of him and I'll consider checking it out again."

 

[soxhop411]

Still sorting out my situation. Looks like TATB will remain on Boston.com. In a weird spot because I write for both.

Any update on your situation ? Extra bases just posted this…  I still do not get how they think this is a good idea….

 
BALTIMORE — Greetings from Baltimore, where the Red Sox season start the season on Monday afternoon.
Wanted to mention that the content you're used to seeing here has been shifted to BostonGlobe.com and the continually updated Red Sox page on that site.
You will get daily lineups, pitching matchups, in-game news, all the latest updates and regular opinion pieces including a random thoughts column on the team every week or so.
On Sunday, for instance, there were pre-game lineups and notes, the news on Jon Lester's contract talks being paused, a story on the roster being set and a report on Shane Victorino's injury.
The Globe staffed all 30 Red Sox spring training games this season and we'll be there for all 162 games of the regular season and beyond. No outlet offers more on-line coverage of the team.
BostonGlobe.com will offer 10 free articles a month. To subscribe, it's 99 cents for the first month then $3.99 a week. That's 57 cents a day.
For that price, you get the content from the daily paper and fresh updates all day long. There are Globe Insider benefits, too.
The Boston Globe iPad app is excellent and feels like reading the actual paper. For fans who want to stay plugged in to the team all day, hopefully you'll see this as a good option.
Extra Bases will remain but the content will be provided by Boston.com and not the staff of the Boston Globe. The Globe sports section was recently voted among the top 10 nationally.

Thanks for reading and enjoy the season. If you have any questions, please feel free to email and I'll answer them as best I can.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2014/03/a_fond_farewell_to_extra_bases.html

 

[CarolinaBeerGuy]

So, they want a little more than $200/year to read their articles online. Hahahahahahaha.

 

[SuperManny]

So, they want a little more than $200/year to read their articles online. Hahahahahahaha.

 
Yeah, they need to offer a yearly rate as well if they want anyone to subscribe. The Washington Post is about $100 a year or $10 a month, for comparison. 

 

[Sampo Gida]

So, they want a little more than $200/year to read their articles online. Hahahahahahaha.

 
They were wise not to allow comments in Petes farewell.
 
Good news for the Herald I think.

 

[Toe Nash]

 
 
You will get daily lineups, pitching matchups, in-game news, all the latest updates and regular opinion pieces including a random thoughts column on the team every week or so.

Daily lineups and pitching matchups can be found in myriad places, most obviously mlb.com.
In-game news and latest updates -- Twitter has it fastest, or if you're watching the game they'll usually update you on important things.
Opinion pieces -- Those are exclusive. But they're the opinions of Abraham, Cafardo, etc...yahoo.
Yes, you get the rest of the Globe content too, but for much of "Red Sox Nation" who lives elsewhere, do they care? I'd bet the sports section sees a lot of visitors from outside NE.
 
I won't pretend to know how to fix newspapers' profitability, but this really doesn't seem to be the way to go, especially for sports. There's just too many places to get the same stuff and Nick Cafardo isn't going to keep the eyeballs there.

 

[nattysez]

I've got the guys on weei.com, the projo guys, a dozen blogs, this site, and Twitter. And I could not care less about general MA news. Why would I ever pay for the Globe?

 

[Sampo Gida]

You still get 10 free articles a month. If you have several devices that's 30 a month.  If someone has something interesting to say, you generally hear about it and can still read it.  Obviously, you can not read game day summaries every day, but who needs that.  Not a big deal except for those who used to like to get under Petes skin on the blog, and while that's fun, its not worth 200 bucks a year.

 

[terrisus]

The less people reading CHB each month, the better.
 
Knowing the Globe though, they'll probably make his columns (or the intro to it) free to read to try to suck people into his idiocy.