Honey wrote:
If it was me, I would remove paywalls for now, to attract new readers for later. Or is that bonkers?
interesting you say that
Honey but
News Ltd has announced that for the next 3 months all their titles will be free to access.
I understand the marketing but I just don't see many flocking to pay eventually for something that is free at the present. Unless they really up the quality.
I actuality subscribe to a few online publications like
Vanity Fair but I find their articles to be a 100 times more investigated and accurate than say..Rupert's trash titles.
Oddly there is one of Rupert's most valued publications-
The Wentworth Courier which I did tons of work for before Murdoch took it over. It was originally owned by one family and dominated Sydney;'s more prestige suburbs with glossy real estate advertising.
## It's also the publication i worked for when I told Rupert at the opening of his
Fox Studios and he said "oh fuck off". Then he went and bought it?!!!!
It got me into the most prestige events for all manner of fab people..Prince Albert of Monaco, princess Diana, dinner with prince Edward (
boooring) and endless minor pop stars but alas..since Rupert took it over it;s gone downhill (
but then so have I 
)
The real problem with paywalls is
not that people will not pay but they
demand superior content and Murdoch's
modus operandi has been to present rubbish.
## I've already had one of Murdoch's most experienced photographers of over 20 years on the phone in a terrible state as they have basically been laid off for the next few months (wife-2 kids & mortgage) and doubt there will be a job to go back to.
It will be fascinating to see what happens in the UK!!!