Keeping with the high density corpse stacking theme, reader Jim Farley sent me his Halloween decorations. That's some serious density
No Daily Brief today but that doesn’t mean there’s nothing to talk about.
For instance, the SCV Winter Shelter has put together an excellent video about the group’s work and about the homeless in Santa Clarita. Check out their website or watch the video below for more. Winter is coming.
Next up: apparently I’m the last person to know this, but Ian Lamont fancies himself Rupert Murdoch and thinks The Signal is the SCV’s Wall Street Journal. Yes, the Signal is going behind a paywall. Hat tip I HEART, who quotes Lamont:
The Signal very soon—right now, you pay to subscribe to the print and to the e-Edition; you don’t pay to subscribe to the website. So you get virtually most of our news content for free. That’s gotta change. We can’t have half of our audience paying for a hundred percent of our audience. So pretty soon that website’s gonna go behind a pay wall. It’ll still only be about 20 cents a day, it’s not gonna break anybody’s wallet, but I’m sure we’re gonna have people screeeam-ing about the fact you’re taking away my free content. Well, that’s what’s coming.
Can’t have those freeloading web visitors mooching off the hard working print subscribers, now can we?
And here I thought I should be the one charging the Signal for my time while all of its processor-intensive advertisements load whenever I visit the site.
So would you pay to access The Signal.com?
Dont’ forget the Food Truck festival this weekend in Bridgeport Marketplace!
Have a great weekend!
Loading ...
I, for one, definitely WILL NOT pay to read The Signal online. Strange that Mr. Lamont hasn’t noticed that model doesn’t work out well, especially for a paper with a less than robust readership.
avpress tried something similar, which they tweaked again and now they give a very brief summary of each article and you need a subscription to read the full article
Yep- the AV Press website was never great (they do NO archiving) but now the fact that you have to PAY to see more than the first few sentences is totally ridiculous. And, compared to The Signal, The AV Press looks like The New York Times! No way is anyone gonna pay for online access to The Signal!!!!!!
Why pay for The Signal when we have scvtalk?
Ha! I can’t imagine anyone paying to read The Signal. What a joke!
Not a chance would I pay a DIME.
Paying for the signal is almost as appealing as using a city library.
Nope, not gonna pay.
Our unscientific small sample is not looking good for the Signal’s pay wall scheme!
When I was in high school (late 90′s), our teachers did not allow us to use articles from the The Signal for “current event” reports because, in their opinion, it was not a real newspaper.
Paywalls didn’t work Slate.com. Even the NYTimes had to roll theirs way back. The Signal is a joke compared to those guys. Who do they think is going to give them money?
The Web is the future (and frankly, to a great degree, the present) of how we get our news. News organizations cannot continue to give it away for free. I believe it’s going to take some time to figure out how to make a paywall system work, but it has to happen, and there needs to be a change to the collective mentality that says “if it’s online it should be free.” The only way news organizations find out what works is by trying. Why pay for The Signal when you have SCVTalk, you say? What happens when the majority of news organizations Jeff links to start charging?
I’ve got to say, I can understand some of the frequent comments here that are to the effect of “The Signal’s such a joke,” but I would urge readers to remember this: The Signal is a daily newspaper with four news reporters to cover a valley of roughly 250,000 people. Let that sink in. There’s only so much the four of them can get to, and they do a good job at it. There’s practically no competition any longer. The Daily News rarely covers the SCV. It’s even more rare for the L.A. Times. I know the haters may start saying this and that about the paper, and you might be right, but after 5 1/2 years with the paper I know how hard the painfully small news team works, particularly the current group of Tammy Marashlian, Jonathan Randles, Natalie Everett and Jim Holt.
Understood. In my view the problem with the Signal is that it is not an investigate style format. Issues of important controversy seem rarely covered, and when they are, they are glossed over to avoid an unfavorable outcome. This seems especially to be the case when the issue is related to our city council and staff, and the business community. The Signal is far from being an “independent” source of news. Ian Lamont’s first step to ward “independence” and improving this perception, would be to withdraw from the Chamber of Commerce.
Judging from this comment, I’d assume you haven’t read The Signal’s news section today, or even recently.
You would be correct, daily no. I find it a waste of time. The name should be changed to the Santa Clarita Daily and drop the News connotation completely.
If you “wasted” a little more time on it, you might find the very things you want to see – investigative series, coverage of controversial issues (yes, even about the City Council and staff) and more.
I’d also argue that blindly criticizing something you admittedly aren’t familiar would be a much more egregious “waste of time” than reading your only local newspaper.
In the spirit of productivity, if you can point to another small, local daily newspaper that meets your standards, please let me know. I’d like to see it.
The Signal is nothing more than a source for story telling controlled by the will of local buisness and the city. If the Signal had a backbone, I may become interested. At this point it seems to be a waste of recycled paper.
Josh, thanks much for your input. I have the Signal delivered daily and I check your on-line service routinely. I think all you guys do a good job and I would pay for on-line services.
If an individual has the paper delivered daily, what is the benefit to paying for the online version? I stopped the paper many years ago when it was delivered free on certain days. On the occasion when Jeff has made reference to the Signal, I might check it out, I may also read the headline when I walk past a newsstand. Very seldom do I buy the paper unless I have another source of information on an issue, and want to see how the Signal has covered it.
I can’t speak to the decisions The Signal’s executives are considering, but other newspapers that go behind paywalls typically allow subscribers free access to the website.
thanks, but why does a individual need both sources?
Gee Bill your videos would suggest a different opinion then the one you are displaying here and in fake kiss ass complaint letters to Stephen K Peeple whining about “name calling”. Imagine that the guy running around calling everyone he doesn’t like a moron or idiot complaining about name calling.
Oh and when you said, I think all you GUYS do a good job and I would pay for on-line services. Who exactly where you referring too? or do you lack the ability to read for comprehension? It is old news that Josh resigned last week, leaving the Signal with the less-then-capable narsassitist stephen K peepleS.
seriously this is the guy they got to replace Josh? What does he work for less maybe just strokes to his ego?
Gee Nate, such bitterness. As stated, I like the Signal very much and I appreciate the interaction I’ve had with a number of Signal employees; they’re all nice people.
Traditionally, newspapers and magazines get most of their income from advertizing. Subscriptions are used to prove circulation, which determines advertizing prices. The internet offers other tools to measure circulation. News is used to increase circulation. A newspaper that depends on $0.20 a day for income is doomed.
I’d be more than willing to subscribe to a paper & online edition of the Signal if I knew the money would be re-invested back here in Santa Clarita in the great reporters you mentioned rather than sent back to Georgia with a big bow on it.
What kind of profit margins is Morris demanding these days? Do you think that this plan, if successful, will lead to better pay for your colleagues?
The reporters that the Signal now have are doing a great job, but Mr. Premako is correct that there are not enough of them to cover the valley with depth.
There are actually many healthy smaller papers around the country, but a lot of them do not have the demands of a large out of state corporation to make sure that the bottom line is fat.
Back when many of the small papers were purchased, they were a good investment, but as newspapers circulation has fallen so have the profits. The corporation then sends in someone to cut costs, and of course labor is one of the only large expenses that is “flexable”.
The Signal makes a profit, but the writing staff gets smaller. The business problem is that a large part of the revenues are derived from the “slicks” (insert ads that are folded into the paper ) which are based on circulation, and the advertisers knowledge that x number of people will read them. Now if the paper cuts the local content to such a degree that people stop looking to the Signal as a source for local news, the circulation falls and people will look elsewhere for their news. People can find ads and “soft news” anywhere.
I will keep subscribing to the Signal as long as there is any reporter there who will look at the local institutions with a critical eye. Jeff and Dave do a great job of pulling info together, but a lot of the local content is from the Signal.
The City of Bell went to hell because there was no watchdog. Subscribe.
Um, yes. What he said.
Are you still working there Josh or is that a rumor?
No rumor. I am no longer working there.
I doubt the Signal would identify a potential Bell type problem. We have one brewing with Frank Ferry, and the Signal gives Frank a free pass or whitewashes the issue.
Come on TimBen, you know better.
You’re right. TimBen actually does know better.
The Signal not only was the first outlet to report the story you’re talking about, but has so far published three stories about it – a nearly combined 2,000 words – and posted the actual letter itself at http://www.the-signal.com.
Here are the first, second and third stories.
If you think they’re “whitewashing” the issue, please let me know how.
Where is the investigation regarding Ferry not living in the City as required to be on the council?
This is a typical “he said she said” kind of article the Signal enjoys. The Signal does nothing to investigate the laws, etc. that may apply to a given story. Besides, this is not the story I am talking about.
Think of the Signal as a watchdog?
My husband and I subscribe to The Signal and we appreciate your work. No one can rely on one source of news for everything – but you are a good source of local and community news. At a time when so many of our community connections are fraying, you help keep us together. Thanks.
Even though it isn’t perfect, the Signal is the most reliable source of news in the SCV. I do subscribe to the print edition, but if there is an extra charge for the online version, I will not pay it. Can’t see the point in that. That said, I imagine in 10 years or so print editions will be gone completely and it will all be on the internet. Someone has to pick up the tab.
Your subscription for the print edition covers the cost of publishing and distribution. The fees for doing the same online are de minimus.
Advertisers are the ones picking up the tab. And as we’ve seen with other sites, local businesses will pay a pretty penny to get eyeballs on their ads.
Advertising revenues are way down these days what with the real estate collapse and slow down in car sales — two major sources of income for local papers.
For traditional print, they are definitely major sources of income.
But for the web, we’ve seen a few recent examples of local sites that are completely supported by sectors outside those two.
At some point in time, someone will find a business model that works. If the signal is status quo, I doubt people will pay for the on-line version. However, if the signal steps up and offers something more we can talk. For the longest time, tv was free, then cable came along and folks thought people were crazy for paying for tv ( my folks purchased cable in the late 70s in Sylmar – bad reception from the tv antenna), now we pay for cable/satellite and pay additional money for premium channels.
The internet isn’t free..Im pretty sure just about everyone pays to have access to the internet, the question is the content of a specific site worth enough to pay a subcription to access?
Look at hulu, sure it’s free, but you have to sit through several commercials, well you watch a show.
Josh is right. Content is never free on the internet. Someone is paying for it. Check a list of newspaper sites in California, then the nation, and you will see that The Signal is simply following the trend (in my opinion a little late). I say let’s hope news organizations find a model that works. Sites like this could not exist without content, and again someone has to pay for that content. Nothing is free. We need the fourth estate for democracy to survive.
I understand that The Signal needs to, and should, make a buck. However, I really doubt that a paywall will work out for them. It just isn’t a successful model for the vast majority of publications. It’s not at all a function of how hard The Signal works, how independent they are, or how they’re the only game in town. I’m not criticizing necessarily. I don’t expect The Signal to solve a problem the music, television, and print industries haven’t been able to collectively.
Why did the Daily news leave the area? Was it because of general financial concerns, or did the GOBN not like the way the Daily reported the news, so they drove the Daily out of the Valley.
At the Wednesday, OCTOBER 20, Canyon Country Advisory Committee Meeting learn more about the Chloride issue.
The Chloride issue has the potential to cost Santa Clarita residents $210 million and raise Sanitation Rates to $650 per year by 2025. It is important that we understand both sides of the issue in order to make an informed decision.
Mike Solomon (General Manager, United Water Conservation District), Rob Roy (President, Ventura County Agricultural Association) and Jeff Pratt (Director, Ventura County) have graciously agreed to present and answer questions about VENTURA’S VIEW OF THE CHLORIDE ISSUE. We need to listen to what they have to say.
Also, meet and hear from CLWA District 1 (Canyon Country and part of Newhall) BOARD CANDIDATES Ed Colley and Kevin Korenthal.
Plus Diane Trautman will be presented a CCAC Home Town Hero Award for her two terms of exemplary service on Santa Clarita’s Planning Commission
THIS IS A MEETING YOU SHOULD NOT MISS.
Mark Your Calendar and Tell Your Friends
The next Canyon Country Advisory Committee Meeting will be held Wednesday, October 20, from 7PM to 9PM, in the Mint Canyon Moose Family Center Banquet Room, 18000 Sierra Highway, Canyon Country.
(Mint Canyon Moose is located 0.6 miles North of Soledad Canyon Road on the East Side of Sierra Highway)
CCAC meetings are free, open to the public and everyone is welcome to attend.
For more information call, Alan Ferdman, 661 713-9344
I dumped the Signal because their reporting turned into press releases, they failed to provide balanced reporting on many critical issues and because there were so many typo’s and erroneous items it was a joke. I remember the sports section one day had both Canyon vs. Saugus as well as Hart and Valencia playing at COC on the same day at the same time. And they had the wrong start time for the correct game Canyon-Saugus.
Not since the series of articles on the need to bid the waste hauling contract have I felt the Signal did a decent job. Sure I’d like to save the newspaper but there needs to be more accurate and balanced reporting. Constantly being the mouthpiece for the GOBN has got to be tempered with views from the folks who live here who may not be quite as enthusiastic about an issue.
http://www.the-signal.com/section/36/article/35083/
Ferry making jokes about the letter writing debacle at the State of the City luncheon, just continues to lower my opinion of him. He came and spoke to a group I was in at the time a few years back and I thought he was well informed and thoughtfully answered every question our group posed. Back then I had respect for him. However seeing how he has been of late I would avoid any future events if his name was listed next to it as a speaker, and as for respect thats at zero right now.
I hope he takes good care of his high horse.
I cancelled my Signal subscription many years ago when I could not get them to stop delivering the paper directly onto the same running sprinkler every morning. That, combined with the fact that aside from (occasionally) their Sunday edition and the Friday Escape, the rest of the week had little content worth reading.
I still do not find that their content would be worth paying for via the Internet. If in fact subscriptions are merely a device to drive ad numbers, it would make more sense to keep it open and free and use the web statistics to sell advertising in that the site will reach a much wider audience than if they put up a pay wall.
Mark Cuban has written a few blog articles about paying for web content. Here’s one of them. Others can be easily searched on his site.
http://blogmaverick.com/2009/08/08/my-advice-to-fox-myspace-on-selling-content-yes-you-can/
Damn, what’s with all the VIPs posting today?
Wait, I’m a VIP? Thanks, Mike! =p
You done kicked it off. It signaled to everyone that it was safe.
Now if only Saugus Splasher could make a return…
I subscribe to The Signal print edition and appreciate the local news coverage. There are special sections available in the Signal’s print edition that I don’t always find online. Plus, morning coffee just isn’t the same without a newspaper in hand.
I don’t get my news from only one source, though. I also subscribe to the Daily News, L.A. Times, San Fernando Valley Business Journal and Los Angeles Business Journal, listen to KNX 1070 and watch KTLA and KCBS evening news. Don’t mind being called a “news junkie” but even with all that, I still start every day with a quick read of The Signal.
I let Jeff do all that, which frees up my time to disagree.
The Signal going behind a pay wall is the beginning of the end, in my opinion. For thousands of people in Santa Clarita, the-signal.com is the way they get local info. I know when I got the paper, I would end up tossing it in recycle all too often because I didn’t get to it OR it would be completely soaked by the sprinklers (seriously, if you see water in the middle of the driveway, can you NOT throw it there?). Going online is the way to get headlines and get on with your busy day. Instead of charging users, why not work hard in beefing up what you provide online and make your site stronger, creating a site that benefits readers AND attracts those big advertisers? If you’re not selling enough e-subscriptions, what makes you think you’re going to get people to pay for headlines they can get somewhere else? It’s like they’re handing the traffic and advertisers over to KHTS. I know if I was a business and promised 50k readers a month, I’d be ticked off when it dwindles down to 5k.
PS Maybe today’s Screamin Coupon offering 75% off will be a kick start to getting people to get the paper. Because we all know once it lands on your driveway, it’s next to impossible to get newspapers to stop.
Good point, Jackie – here’s the deal they’re offering: $25 for a full year. That’s $75 off the normal $100 price.
Here’s the link: Screamin Coupons
I took them up on the deal.
I am thinking of doing the eVersion but they really don’t explain how it works. Would love something like the New York Times app, I know that is wishful thinking.