Comments on: Hearst developing e-reader, charging for e-news

Company behind about 16 daily and 49 weekly newspapers, as well as hundreds of magazines, says it's going to launch its own e-reader and start charging for some online content.

[TomMariner]

One man's magazine reader is another's medical device.

You guys should kinow better than to wave red meat technology in front of the hungry jaws of folks that make things for doctors. Gimme. Now. So I can help make you healthier tomorrow!

[Fil0403]

Cool, now they just need Oprah to advertize it.

[didir1010]

This is ridiculous. Why start from scratch and create your own e-reader when the Kindle already has subscriptions to newspapers and magazines on it? Why not just have your subscriptions available on the Kindle? I can't imagine buying their e-reader just to read magazines and newspapers when I already own the Kindle and can read magazines, books and newspapers there instead.

[abogey]

The reason the Kindle won't work for them is, among other factors, advertising.

They need a screen large enough to show adds along with the content, and coor would also be important.

I don't see such a device succeding. It will be expensive and there are too many source of 'free' news.

[marc_90292]

There is another reason why Kindle won't work: black and white doesn't do so good if we talk magazines like O, or any other one using color. Given that the cost for a b&w Kindle is not affordable for most, a color version would be sold at an even higher price. These guys don't see that subscriptions would bring in the money, - like RIAA they are still in the caves.

[jscott418]

I cannot see the attraction in getting news on these things. Maybe if these things had come out 10 years ago when news papers still had a calling. But free news is all over and their is no real angle for newspapers to charge online for this.

[forever4now]

I think the key to success will be in the "packaging". I could potentially see myself flipping through a well produced e-magazine/e-newspaper on the sofa or at the beach on a device like the Plastic Logic reader.

[jimgsf]

Unfortunately this is destined to fail proving AGAIN that media conglomerates do not get it. Lowering the barrier to entry is going to be their quickest path to recovery. Forcing customers in a recession to buy a new piece of electronics to get the news is not going to fly particularly when computers and cell phones are wide spread and easily accessed. I haven't purchased a paper in over 10 years not because I don't like newspapers, but because they haven't kept pace with reader behavior. Sadly they've yet to learn anything over the past 10+ years.

[forever4now]

When you consider all time & resources involved to produce newspapers/magazines (cutting trees for paper, ink, electricity for production, gas for shipping, paper collection & recycling, ...), an e-reader seems like a no-brainer solution.

With the e-reader model, once the production of the e-magazine/e-paper is complete, it can be distributed globally, almost instantaneously. Lower cost...less waste...potentially larger subscription base.

[mmagliaro]

These news agencies just don't get it. I never EVER pay for any on-line news, and I don't know anybody who does. The current quality of news coming from these media companies is HORRIBLE. They all pick up the same lame feeds from the same pool of reporters, all slip-shod, poorly fact-checked, all rushed to publication without the most important facts because those take too long to get.
And to cap it, their writing, whether on-line or in print, has steadily gone down the tubes because
none of them use real proof-readers (and they haven't for years). Ever since they started relying solely on idiotic spell-checkers, we have had to suffer typo after typo, and phrases and words completely out of context.

In short, they aren't doing a good job reporting and they aren't doing a good job writing. People are tuning out in droves, which is why printed newspapers and magazines are in trouble. When we pay, we expect quaiity. So what makes them think I will pay for the same shoddy quality on-line? Because it's convenient? Don't make me laugh.

[evanklug]

The eReader is so cool. I saw them at Wal-Mart. They're expensive though.

[evanklug]

idk my bff jill?!

[fastfred1]

Well let's see.... who pays for the eReader ? Me? Then I have to pay for the news.
And if I'm and older person who doesn't have internet savvy no uplink. I should have to pay for that too. For what to read Oprah Windy's Magazine or the San Francisco Newspaper?
Or is Hearst gonna be an IP so he can make money with too. I wonder if he is handling the warranty work on the eReader .......I see more lay offs coming.

[UpajOs]

"It looks as if the e-paper revolution is really about to start."

As far as the new business is concerned, the revolution came and went over 10 years ago. As most people know, free online news has been ubiquitous for years. Hearst is very, very late to the party.

Why should I pay for news, especially from Hearst, the company that's responsible for "yellow journalism?" I get a better, fairer overview from AM talk radio stations, and there are plenty of free feeds and blogs to get the details.

Moreover, if their service works as poorly as CNET news, free news providers have nothing to fear. (I had to try several browsers and operating systems before I found a combination that allowed me to type these words -- in this instance, Firefox running on Ubuntu Linux. The CNET site doesn't work at all with SeaMonkey on Windows 98 and several other combinations I've tried. Maybe it works with Internet Explorer 7 on Windows Vista, but that's not a combination that I use, or ever will use. Pathetic.) The day people find out that they need to buy a new computer and switch to a particular operating system in order to use the Hearst e-book reader is the day that their service will bite the dust, regardless if it is for pay or for free. What do you want to bet that they'll opt for Microsoft Digital Rights Management (DRM) as part of their distribution scheme, locking out users of non-Microsoft systems, or users of earlier Microsoft systems prior to Windows XP?

[perumula]

I respectfully suggest that you Get a Mac! People who remain with Microhard's software know what they're getting into, i.e. virus after patch after virus, not to mention staid styling and gross copying of everyone else's innovations!!
I adore CNET and have never had any problem with comments on the site.

We already have a device for reading electronically it is called a PC or internet capble phone, why not have all media subcription based? There is no cost to print and deliver essentially so why not make it like a $1 a month or less, in mass this would be a huge revenue base plus you could still slip in advertising, you don't think no commercial television doesn't work in branding?

[mobilemavy]

It's already unreadable swill. Nobody will buy the device or buy the product.