Comment

Comment by KnOwMaN on December 8, 2009 at 5:08pm

Erm, I don't stay in UK so I don't pay anything to BBC or anyone else. I could still access BBC's news articles free. So I assume, people in UK whom paid get more articles first hand or perhaps they get to watch videos? At least BBC do not act like a child whining at a search engine to stop indexing what and what.

Comment by JS on December 8, 2009 at 12:31pm

Gordon, ~£150/a year is a small price to pay compared to commercial news sources promoting their sponsors... And besides, the quality of the content is simply so much better than commercial sources. Compare the BBC television channels to ITV or Five and you will see, what I mean. (Not channel 4 though since that is actually good sometimes).

Comment by JS on December 8, 2009 at 12:17pm

Oh, sorry. It does cover BBC News: http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/

Comment by JS on December 8, 2009 at 12:16pm

Actually, I'm not sure the License fee covers BBC news. Isn't that just for BBC's TV and Radio channels? (Isn't BBC News owned by BBC Worldwide, which is a commercial company? I could be terribly wrong here.)

Comment by JS on December 8, 2009 at 11:49am

BBC News will always remain free, even though I would love to pay for that.

Comment by LADYTECH on December 8, 2009 at 11:18am

Slightly but with good points. I must confess I do click on them every now and them cuz I have run into a few awesome (lots of discounts) sites. But really it's not why I come here.

Hey, maybe u can start that topic discussion. "If THIS SITE was suddenly changed into a PAY site, would you spend money on it?"

Comment by LADYTECH on December 8, 2009 at 10:58am

You asked...If THIS SITE was suddenly changed into a PAY site, would you spend money on it? Probably not! Although I like hangn around. It's really not what it used to. I guess summertime is the best time for GEEKS. That's the time I had the most fun in here. Sometimes it gets very BOOOOOring in here and the topics are just not interesting. A lot of my favs don't come on as often. We all say that about each other... Life is busy and even us GEEKS have priorities to set.

But maybe if CP participated more and not in just making silly comments. But as THE GEEK OF ALL GEEKS GUIDING HIS FOLLOWERS. Then maybe.

Comment by FFB413 on December 8, 2009 at 8:21am

No I wouldn't pay for online news the same as I don't pay for a daily newspaper because it's 99% filler and 1% actual news.
The only news I pay for is BBC news which I'm happy to do if it will keep at least one source of hysteria free news reporting going but I do sometimes wonder if it's entirely necessary that we get news reports about the latest Tiger Woods scandal on the BBC. It's not really news is it. Sometimes I'll read it but it's the equivalent of gossiping over the garden fence. Something you do when you are bored.

Comment by Allan on December 8, 2009 at 5:23am

From what I see.. Newspapers sell news... so they create much of it themselves!
The UK press is renowned for this... I recall one famous story about a World War 2 Bomber being found on the moon! The next week the story was "World War 2 Bomber on moon vanishes!".
Two stories for the price of one!
Much of the news 'sold' by newspapers and TV is just filling space. If you want to pay people to fill space.. go to it.
Which news source would you rely on? Fox, BBC, MSNBC? My choice would always be the BBC - they have no pecuniary interest.

Comment by KnOwMaN on December 8, 2009 at 1:16am

Then why have a website there in the first place? If you don't put your news there people will buy your papers if it is worth the cents or dollars. Google should start their own news services instead.