News Corporation Shutting Down Digital Newspaper 'The Daily'

[webbuzz]

Originally Posted by lilo777

Just think about it. iPhones (and smart phones in general) are more used by younger and better educated people who statistically indeed tend to vote for democrats. Southern rednecks on the other hand still use dumb phones.

Dumbest comment of the year, perhaps next year as well. Congratulations.

[jasone6]

this is a pity—because The Daily was beautifully-designed. It truly was revolutionary, and a really enjoyable way to consume/digest content.

[DCRowe44]

So what happens to the $39.99 I paid for the app? I read the daily every day. I love the interaction with the different polls and quizzes. I post and forward stories to others within my circles... Instead of having to go to 10 different sites, I get it all put together for me.

[miamialley]

Wow, big shocker there. People don't want to pay $52 per year for news when they can download numerous free apps and if all else go on websites?

Dumb business model. Your own fault.

[Chocolatemilty]

News curation apps like Flipboard and iPad-focused news sites did The Daily in. That, and the quality of free content has surpassed that of this paid news source, and that ended its doing. Old media, even with new technology, with always be old media.

[Ramboxman]

Originally Posted by syndalis

I dunno - I think the New York Times is seeing some decent returns off of their online initiative. 454,000 subscribers as of march of this year, alongside an increase in home deliveries, and no decrease in web traffic alongside increased use of the apps.

digital subscriptions and paid news works... when the content is worth the money. The Daily did not meet that criteria.

I agree with this statement, I subscribed to the Daily because I liked the concept but not the material. Flipboard and Twitter are much more resourceful. But at the same time I am keeping my New York Times paper and all digital access and feel that they have some great journalists, lacking only in technology news.

[Amazing Iceman]

Originally Posted by AdonisSMU

How about upper management take a pay cut and investors take a pay cut first? Just because you didnt pay for the news or the journalism doesnt mean someone didnt have to pay for it be it advertisers or consumers...but in this case the damaged image of fox news and Newscorp in general definitely played a part in the daily's demise.

If you were the investor, would you really accept a pay cut?
Business are created to generate income, which should always grow. Income cut backs are not acceptable.

Investors lend their money under specific conditions that have to be met.
Investors would take their money and invested somewhere else rather than taking a cut back.

[ThunderSkunk]

Hmmm. Hate is a strong word.

It applies though.

[haruhiko]

Originally Posted by Ramboxman

I agree with this statement, I subscribed to the Daily because I liked the concept but not the material. Flipboard and Twitter are much more resourceful. But at the same time I am keeping my New York Times paper and all digital access and feel that they have some great journalists, lacking only in technology news.

I like Zite more because this app learn your preferences over time, however it hasn't been updated for a long long time (esp. the iPhone 5 resolution), I think the developer has abandoned it. :-(

----------

Originally Posted by Night Spring

I agree that The Magazine's content isn't much, and it is only doing well because of very low overhead. But I like the format/design. It loads very fast, has nothing other than table of content and the articles, and is extremely easy to navigate -- doesn't have me puzzling over whether I scroll vertically or horizontally or tap the left edge to get to the next page. I wish all iPad magazines were as easy to use as The Magazine, and that other iPad magazines would hire Marco Arment to write their iOS apps for them. All iPad magazines I've tried seems to think that because they are on the iPad, they have to have multimedia content or have fancy swiping effects. But all I want is to READ THE WORDS. Multimedia and fancy swipes only get in the way. Marco understands this, and I hope more publishers see this, which is why I subscribe to The Magazine.

One example is the Nat Geo Magazine. Superb content, great articles. However, the text are always centered with 30% of the "page" width as margins, which is a waste on screen estate (this problem will be more prominent with the iPad mini). Texts cannot be selected so there are no copy and paste and no dictionary. Some articles require scrolling down, but some require flicking left and right.

[jacobtaylor1987]

Great concept.
Lousy content.

It was nothing but tabloid crap.
I am more than happy to pay a subscription to read news on my iPad (and I do), but it needs to be of a high quality.

----------

Originally Posted by carmenodie

Oh, I'm crying so hard. Who the heck cares.

I care because it means a better news organisation is now less likely to try something similar. The consensus here seems to be that people would pay if the content were better. Now it's likely we won't be given that chance.

[JimAtLaw]

I think a lot the high end users who were in the target audience already subscribe to the WSJ though the app (or perhaps NYT, etc.), and there is also the free USA Today app and content if you're in that crowd.

It just doesn't seem like there's a need to distinguish a digital newspaper when the best traditional newspapers are already doing a decent job of it. (Love the WSJ app! Had a brief hiccup when I upgraded to iPad 3 as they use their own fonts and needed to deliver fonts for retina display, but they fixed that in response to my (and I'm sure others') bug report, and since then it's been glorious for the most part.)

[KTF]

these far left communist liberals hate this Man!
F.U

[yanki01]

fantastic news - no care.

[KTF]

Originally Posted by lilo777

Why is it clueless? I totally agree with the guy. There is nothing wrong with having news sources/analysis of all political orientations. However, FOX New is a the only major new organisation that uses obvious lies for propaganda purposes. They brainwash their listeners and this is not good.

I totally agree with Macboy Pro.

Note
CNN & MSNBC They Brainwash Their Listeners.

[kuwxman]

I subscribed; it was a great magazine. Will be sad to see it go. Now, saying that, do I get a refund for whats left on my subscription?

[WissMAN]

I tried to like the articles. But IMO they were poorly written. Didn't mind the subscription model or the delivery. Load time was a little slow compared to a browser.

[Dionte]

It's hard to get alot of people to pay for something they get free from so many places.

[RolyPolyBird]

From Wil Shipley on Twitter...

"Maybe people who own iOS devices aren’t stupid enough to read Murdoch papers, like I ****ING SAID IN THE FIRST PLACE?"

[robanga]

Originally Posted by Dionte

It's hard to get alot of people to pay for something they get free from so many places.

Nothing is really free though. The ads on internet content are sometimes ridiculously presented, popovers, pre-rolls etc. You pay for it one way or another.

[gameboy213]

Originally Posted by ralphdaily

I'm a subscriber, read the Daily every day, and will miss it.

Maybe I'm the minority too. But i actually like the daily. I thought it was pretty well put together and the technology was really moving forward. I will miss it.

Wasn't very hard-hitting but it was worth a look at regularly.

----------

Originally Posted by ChazUK

Hang on..... I think I see it...



Yep, there's your problem. A perfectly capable web browser.

True. Although that doesn't help when you don't have a solid Internet connection. I still like actual news apps that download the content. I use them daily.

----------

Originally Posted by wolfshades

I'm a little shocked at this news. ("Little" because of TheDaily's earlier money problems).

I've been a long-standing subscriber who has enjoyed the hell out of this paper and am sad to see it go. For those who think simple web pages are better, let me tell you: they're not. The Daily had a lot of great technical dyamics to it not found on most websites, one of which includes nested commenting that is far superior than any website I've seen (outside of WordPress blogs).

It was a trip.

Totally agree.

[pachecorigo]

Originally Posted by ctyrider

I did a trial of The Daily back in the day.. The quality of their original content wasn't good enough to justify paid subscription. The "USA Today" caliber content doesn't cut it, given the wealth of high quality & free online news.

Also, their format with once-a-day static issues may work in a world of printed newspaper.. But it doesn't work online, where people are accustomed to instant and always-on news.

It only makes sense that The Daily failed.

Daily? Hell I need an Hourly!

[Dionte]

Originally Posted by robanga

Nothing is really free though. The ads on internet content are sometimes ridiculously presented, popovers, pre-rolls etc. You pay for it one way or another.

That's true, I won't go back to some sites because of ads.

Didn't the daily have ads too?

[whitedragon101]

When Murdoch and all his companies disappear the world will be better for it.

One step closer

[Macboy Pro]

Originally Posted by lilo777

Why is it clueless? I totally agree with the guy. There is nothing wrong with having news sources/analysis of all political orientations. However, FOX New is a the only major new organisation that uses obvious lies for propaganda purposes. They brainwash their listeners and this is not good.

Not even sure how to respond. Your analysis of brainwashing it utterly IGNORANT and clearly demonstrates the fact that you have never watched Fox News. We can disagree though!

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by robanga

Agreed - When you do it right and offer something that the consumer wants it can work. The Times does interesting bundling too. Buy one and you get a price break on the others. Perhaps the right thing for Murdoch to do was to take one of the existing properties and make it work like that. Although perhaps the universal appeal of the Times or the Wallstreet Journal does not exist on his side.

Murdoch's company owns the WSJ. His company is capable of putting out serious news. However, it needs to make money, too, so it also owns the New York Post and broadcasts shows like Sean Hannity.