Should you subscribe to your own publication?

I would offer that they aren't paying you to read the paper at work.

rb

 

This answer is much bigger than the specific question it was intended to answer.
Hence, my friends, newspapers are struggling in their move to intergrate the Web.

If this newspaperman will not buy his own paper because he can get the same stuff for free, why should Bob and Jane? What's more troubling, Bob and Jane's kids, Mark and Jenna, will grow up without a newspaper. So, in five to nine years, when they leave home, they will not use a paper, either.

We're not only losing readers, we're losing generations.

 

If that's the smartass kind of attitude we're going to take, I'd further venture that the paper isn't paying me to read the paper at all. They're paying me to write.

Now, as to the quality of said writing.....

 

If we want to blame the web for lost readers, that's one thing. If we want to base it on paper staffers not buying it, then we're just fooling ourselves.

And the whole analogy of not voting doesn't ring true. That's part of a participatory democracy. I contributed my ass off when I worked at my last paper. Not having a subscription didn't diminish my input, nor does it mean I lose my right to bitch.

 

Alley, that wasn't my point...

Subscribers see it the same way. Why pay? It's free, and when I go to work, I'll breeze through the headlines.

(That said, I've always had a subscription. Because, there are off days and some things change after I leave the office.)

 

I never subscribe, because usually I'll read the paper before it goes to press, and then read it again in the morning looking for errors. No way am I paying to do more work.

 

I realize that. But, I have noticed -- AND YOU WON'T BELIEVE THIS-- when the paper is delivered to my home, there are sections in it other than Sports.

 

My beef wasn't with you, and I do agree about the Web access and some people's belief that it siphons off real subscribers. I just don't think staffers getting subscriptions will help. That's like putting a band aid on an arm abrasion when you're bleeding from your head.

 

You're absolutely right. What it is, when you see a Circulation Manager send out an email like that, is panic. Last-ditch effort. Hitting the Panic Button. Bullshit. Any other cliche that comes to mind.

 

STFU!

 

With sinking subscriber numbers and rising operating costs, my last rag's circulation department offered giveaways with every paid membership: A wall clock. Cheap, plain and they'd been sitting in boxes for years.

(They also gave away mugs commemorating the paper's 150 years (or whatever) of operation and continued to do so about five years AFTER the anniversary.)

 

My take: I work my ass off for my paper. My job requires me to be in the office oh... maybe 45 of 52 weekends per year. I'm only one of three newsroom employees (along with the other two prep writers) who both write and do pages on a weekly basis. On nights when I'm not on the desk, I still stare at the paper for an hour proofing pages. I come in early or stay late, hours I don't report, because of interviews I need to do that can't be accomplished while working on the desk. I've driven my car into the ground for the paper, only to watch the bean counters dick me on mileage at every opportunity. No matter how hard I work, how well I write, how many awards I win, my raise will never increase over the piddly amount they dole out. My life revolves around the paper, and I suppose that's as much my fault as it is the hours. The last thing I want to see when I wake up in the morning is a paper on my doorstep. So no, I don't subscribe to the paper. What they get out of me is far more valuable than whatever reduced rate they may offer... and I won't give them the satisfaction of taking any more of my money.