News Corporation Shutting Down Digital Newspaper 'The Daily'

[robpow]

That's the headline I wanted to see!

[ictiosapiens]

Originally Posted by KPOM

...and that the rest of its news content had a conservative bias that probably didn't play well with the iPad demographic.

This!

[sjenkins49]

I read it every day, I will miss it.

[JoJack82]

Originally Posted by needfx

Not shedding any tears over it

Same here and this is probably why it is failing, no one wants to pay for it. I think it is a good idea to have an iPad (or even tablet only) magazine/newspaper. I even kind of liked The Daily, looking past the conservative bias. I just don't see how it can make money. It's hard to justify spending money on something when its mostly readily available information from the web.

edit: clarification

[GQB]

Originally Posted by lyngo

Now if I could just disable the Newsstand app :/. I can't even put it into a folder to "hide" it.

Yes, its such a terrible 1st world problem that you have to put it on a last screen that you never have to see.
Where do I send the flowers?

[stuaz]

Can't see how it will succeed while BBC exists really.

But yeah in the UK the murdoch name is pretty tarnished, especially with the whole NotW thing.

And I know friends and family in the US generally stear clear of Fox related news sources....

[TXCraig]

I subscribed to the Daily and loved reading it every day... but the NewCorp Right Wing spin on it was too much for me to handle and I stopped reading it. Every day they were bashing the President for something and the editorials were even worse. I think there is a need for this and I think it can be profitable... but not NewsCorp...

[Rogifan]

Originally Posted by KPOM

The "balanced" aspect comes from the FCC's since-repealed "fairness doctrine" that required TV broadcasters to present both sides of a political discussion. They had to at least pretend to show both sides or they could lose their license. MSNBC uses "Lean Forward" now. CNN still pretends they are objective. Fox actually owns the "Fair and Balanced" trademark but don't really emphasize it.

Some version of the "fairness doctrine" exists in the UK as far as TV broadcasts are concerned. That said, in the UK newspapers are blatantly more biased than American papers, and far more open about their editorial bent.

The Daily's issue was likely that sites like TMZ do a better job of covering what used to be tabloid material, and that the rest of its news content had a conservative bias that probably didn't play well with the iPad demographic.

That's what I like about UK papers. When reading the Guardian or Independent you know you're getting a left of center perspective and when reading the Telegraph it's right of center. UK papers don't try to hide their biases.

----------

Originally Posted by Westside guy

Because once the last paid reporter loses his job, the spigot of "free" news will have pretty much dried up.

Social media coverage of major news events is, at best, spotty. It's generally a mess, and it lacks both substance and perspective.

Whose perspective though? I think people that want more in depth coverage with perspective will pay for it.

[macduke]

Originally Posted by KdParker

Why pay for news that you can get for free somewhere else.

I often see Android users asking this same question: "Why should we pay for something that we can get for free or really cheap?" Many Apple users already know the answer: "We pay for quality."

The Daily was not quality.

[HeyKenny]

Good riddance. Murdoch fail.

[louis Fashion]

Originally Posted by ictiosapiens

I don't know in America, but outside of it, the name Murdoch is toxic, and nobody looking for real news would even consider anything with that name attached to it. In Britain, the only Murdoch paper with some respectability, is The Times, and that's because Murdoch keeps reminding us of how "independent" its editorship is... Personally I wouldn't touch that either.

Oh don't worry about America. There are many Murdoch haters here!!

[SvK]

news flash Rupert:

most iphone / ipad users are democrats. We tend to not gravitate towards FOX.

[taurokeros]

Isn't a digital propaganda "news" outlet from Murdoch.
I would bargain that The Daily suffered more from people being turned off by a corporatists liar than the idea of a digital news source.

Now, at $50 a year, I'd be willing to get a subscription to the Financial Times or The Real News, but not anything Fox....

[connectcctv@mac]

I pay about £0.50 per day for the BBC. I get TV radio internet. I don't get Ads of any other News corp BS. I wish he would close all this companies.

[louis Fashion]

Maybe when the UK police got after News Corp for hacking, the news value of the Daily decreased. Could not get all those inside scoops anymore.

[robanga]

I was/am a subscriber. Mainly, because i wanted to support the concept. The publication is enjoyable but truly i probably only read about 20% of the issues, even in part.

Its hard to compete with free as everyone points out, regardless of the quality, at least as it pertains to many categories of products.

Media/Content companies have to adapt to a world where paper will continue to trend down until its boutique only. They have to put out quality content based on a much lower cost structure and where the business model is about advertising, edutainment, product placement, advertainment etc.

This means lower compensation across the industry, outsourcing, freelancing, less management, less vice presidents, less vanity spending by a business that has a history of controlling access to information and the benefits that once came from that.

[I WAS the one]

Im a subscriber of the daily. the first months were great. good content. on top of every news before anyone else. then Yahoo was first on the hot topics, then they changed the content, then they turn FOX-mental-news-way and now is garbage. I have it on my newsstand but I don't read it. waste of money, something happened. internal stuff.

[Pman17]

Never understood it. I thought it was way too complicated to use when I tried if for free. I use flipboard for daily news.

[corinhorn]

Originally Posted by SvK

news flash Rupert:

most iphone / ipad users are democrats. We tend to not gravitate towards FOX.

Really? How do you know that most iPhone/iPad users are democrats?

I have an iPhone and iPad and I'm a libertarian (no, not a Ron Paul fan).

[Radio]

Ping and MobileMe are waiting for u

[WestonHarvey1]

Originally Posted by KPOM

The Daily's issue was likely that sites like TMZ do a better job of covering what used to be tabloid material, and that the rest of its news content had a conservative bias that probably didn't play well with the iPad demographic.

I think the 100 million iPads out there are in the hands of more than just liberals. Rush Limbaugh hands them out to his listeners like candy.

[scat999999]

I hated that I couldn't zoom or enlarge the text.

[robanga]

Originally Posted by corinhorn

Really? How do you know that most iPhone/iPad users are democrats?

I have an iPhone and iPad and I'm a libertarian (no, not a Ron Paul fan).

I'd guess that there would be a leaning toward democratic voting by the installed base of these products. Not a huge majority but certainly a majority similar to the general population in the last election.

Now if there were any real difference between democrats and republicans it would be more interesting

[mytdave]

Don't know what to think. Pioneering digital magazines, cool. 'The Daily' offering any content I'm really interested in, no. Is there a chance for digital magazines to be successful, unknown...

I'm afraid the 'web' pretty much took over digital content long ago. Am I interested in digital books? Yes, very much so. But for 'magazines' or 'news'... I already have an endless supply of free (ad sponsored) resources on the 'web' I'm already comfortable with. Digital magazines and newspapers may just be a non-starter - I'm afraid they're way too late to the party, that ship has sailed.

[Earendil]

I don't understand.

I lean towards liberal (especially using today's definition), and I don't have a clue if The Daily leaned one way or the other. I'm aware of News Corp's slant, but they own a shietton of other media that I do enjoy, so that isn't a good reason.

What I don't understand is how, as a 28 y.o. that does not read traditional paper news papers, but does keep up with the news (general, world, and tech), and owns two iOS devices (iPhone and iPad), I only ever heard about the Daily from MacRumors. I don't get it.

Was I not the target audience? I'm not even saying that I would have paid for it, but if I AM the target audience, then how the frack was I supposed to buy into their product in this digital age if I was never even aware of it? It's no wonder to me that it failed.