Dewey Defeats headghgh
― real eyes realize real truffle fries (dyao), Friday, 4 June 2010 10:31 (thirteen years ago) link
headline headghgh in topless bar
― joe, Friday, 4 June 2010 10:33 (thirteen years ago) link
"We Wgfgfgfg"
(It'll be on Have I got News for you, doubtless)
― Mark G, Friday, 4 June 2010 10:36 (thirteen years ago) link
ah: "The error comes as journalists across Johnston Press mull group-wide strike action in protest against staffing levels and the introduction of the Atex production system.
"Press Gazette understands that Atex, which allows reporters to input stories directly on to page layouts, has been introduced across Johnston Press titles in the south of England."
― joe, Friday, 4 June 2010 10:38 (thirteen years ago) link
http://editorial.jpress.co.uk/Includes/Images/BTJ/front-bed22.gif
fwiw
― nakhchivan, Friday, 4 June 2010 10:39 (thirteen years ago) link
who do you believe? the bedford time and citizen's website or your own lying eyes?
― joe, Friday, 4 June 2010 10:45 (thirteen years ago) link
http://imgur.com/xIC0G.png
― James Mitchell, Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:17 (thirteen years ago) link
News Sharter?
― sent from my neural lace (ledge), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:20 (thirteen years ago) link
*creature harbours grudge against blodes
― WHEN CROWS GO BAD (suzy), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:22 (thirteen years ago) link
LOLLLLLL, blondes
"News Shower" is very Morris-esque.
― I'm being a smartass here, but in a fun way (NotEnough), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:23 (thirteen years ago) link
It's actually the News Shopper, ahem, paper of record in Lewisham & Catford.
― Matt DC, Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:29 (thirteen years ago) link
Have you noticed issues with crows?
― WHEN CROWS GO BAD (suzy), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:39 (thirteen years ago) link
It's only ever guns, crows and crack these days.
― Matt DC, Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:40 (thirteen years ago) link
Don't forget the foxes. Animals be fighting back.
― sent from my neural lace (ledge), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:42 (thirteen years ago) link
Crow update: http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/8208903.CATFORD__Elderly_dancer_reveals_crow_attack_horror/
― Will toss in some pants too! (useless chamber), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:47 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/resources/images/1323867/
keen dancer and former actress, you say
― I wonder if heaven got a Netto (DJ Mencap), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:50 (thirteen years ago) link
she's no tipi hedren
― Don't look at the finger (Ste), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:51 (thirteen years ago) link
She's Edna Lunt
― Wenlock & Mandelson (Tom D.), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:53 (thirteen years ago) link
from IMDB
Edna Lunt:Letters of Service (2004) .... Dancing Patient
― Don't look at the finger (Ste), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 10:56 (thirteen years ago) link
omg terrifying my gf is a blonde Lewisham/Catford jogger. I know someone who'll be getting a hard hat for her next birthday.
― tetrahedron of space (woof), Wednesday, 9 June 2010 11:10 (thirteen years ago) link
Heard magpies do this all the time in Australia, and that they have to wear special hats.... hang on a sec, this might be a dream...
― GamalielRatsey, Wednesday, 9 June 2010 11:19 (thirteen years ago) link
No, it's not.
― GamalielRatsey, Wednesday, 9 June 2010 11:22 (thirteen years ago) link
Erk, just read about the Mirror cutting a third of its staff. Dark times. Though I guess it's lost, what, half its readers during the past 10 or 15 years?
― James Mitchell, Thursday, 10 June 2010 20:40 (thirteen years ago) link
press gazette says a quarter of the staff of the mirror, the smirror and the people? made £70m profit last year as well per NUJ. what a bunch of cunts. newspapers shouldn't be plcs.
― joe, Thursday, 10 June 2010 21:07 (thirteen years ago) link
This was kind of worrying/a blow too. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10278700.stm My friends who work for DC Thompson are based at the other site, but it doesn't bode well, I guess. Also not that many companies that still print their own magazines etc., I think.
― textbook blows on the head (dowd), Thursday, 10 June 2010 21:08 (thirteen years ago) link
The crow attack story really belongs in the "Stuff that looks like the Onion" thread
― hills like white people (Hurting 2), Friday, 11 June 2010 21:33 (thirteen years ago) link
A STUNNED mum nearly choked on her favourite chocs - after she found one shaped like a WILLY.
http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01065/sna1523choc280_1065094a.jpg
Last night a Cadbury's spokesman said: "It appears some of the Nibbles have melted."We will of course offer a full refund if the consumer is unhappy."
"We will of course offer a full refund if the consumer is unhappy."
― James Mitchell, Tuesday, 15 June 2010 07:02 (thirteen years ago) link
WelcomeOur old website has been switched off: enjoy the new
Live at 9am: webchat with Gary Neville
OpinionSoldiers must get same leniency as the IRADaniel Finkelstein
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 15 June 2010 22:59 (thirteen years ago) link
wait, I'm sorry, I'm only just learning about the chocolate genitals
"My two-and-a-half-year-old grandson eats these and I'd have been horrified if he'd found it."
BUT HE HAS REAL GENITALS
― oɔsıqɐu (nabisco), Thursday, 17 June 2010 23:53 (thirteen years ago) link
Two-and-a-half is a bit young to be learning about eating a bag of dicks tbf,
― slow motion hair ruffle (onimo), Friday, 18 June 2010 09:49 (thirteen years ago) link
The Times loses half its traffic since introducing paywall
Still probably too early to judge, and impossible to know how that compares with their projections, but that looks like a pretty decent result to me, no?
Is there still advertising behind the paywall?
― Upt0eleven, Thursday, 24 June 2010 14:59 (thirteen years ago) link
there were hardly any ads when i looked at it during the trial period. i presume they want that to change, because the subs revenue on its own is going to be pitiful.
― joe, Thursday, 24 June 2010 15:06 (thirteen years ago) link
I bought the Wall Street Journal a couple of times recently and got the impression that Murdoch has in fact changed it for the worse. I mean I haven't read it consistently in a few years, but I remember that I used to really like it outside of the editorial page. Today I was particularly put off by a cover story that seemed to be stealth-blaming the federal government for the BP disaster because BP "relied on" some 2004 government report that said that the effects of an oil spill wouldn't be as bad as this.
― hills like white people (Hurting 2), Thursday, 24 June 2010 15:07 (thirteen years ago) link
color me surprised
My sources say that not only is nobody subscribing to the website, but subscribers to [The Times] itself—who have free access to the site—are not going beyond the registration page. It’s an empty world.
― like a ◴ ◷ ◶ (dyao), Friday, 16 July 2010 13:36 (thirteen years ago) link
"Times loses almost 90% of online readershipLess than three weeks after the Times paywall went up, data shows a massive decline in web traffic"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jul/20/times-paywall-readership
(linked to from http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/07/27/london-times)
― markers, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:48 (thirteen years ago) link
looks like someone already pointed this out upthread
― markers, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:49 (thirteen years ago) link
"london times" lol
well what rupert wants, rupert gets
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:50 (thirteen years ago) link
on the other hand, advertising is fucked too:
“We have been so overtly dependent on advertising as the turbine that runs this place, and that is a very, very risky model as we emerge from the recession,” Condé CEO Chuck Townsend told The Times. “In a company like ours where 70 percent of our margins are generated on the advertising side, we must develop a much, much more effective financial relationship with the consumer.” That is, get money from the consumer instead of the advertiser.Good luck.
Good luck.
― joe, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:53 (thirteen years ago) link
interesting article about conde nast and news apps, and how they might be more attractive advertising platforms than the web - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/16/ipad_saves_wired/
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:55 (thirteen years ago) link
The bind is pretty obvious - the more you charge -> the fewer subscribers you have -> the less you can make off advertising (unless your smaller subscriber base is especially worth targeting due to being loaded or some such)
― uNi-tArDs (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:55 (thirteen years ago) link
im not an expert or anything but it strikes me that publications charging for their web advertising on a per-click basis are seriously undervaluing their ad space.
― max, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 16:58 (thirteen years ago) link
i've only just realized that it is impossible to click on an actual newspaper advertisement
therefore they should be free!
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:01 (thirteen years ago) link
exactly
― max, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:02 (thirteen years ago) link
I don't know how much online advertising costs but it seems like it should be the same cost as print per reader/viewer PLUS a per click fee
― uNi-tArDs (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:11 (thirteen years ago) link
i know all ads aren't like this, but i can't believe anyone actually clicks on something like, say, the little Google text ads they've started inserting at the bottom of YouTube videos
― markers, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:20 (thirteen years ago) link
^ i'm sure there are surveys and all that proving me wrong, but this^
― "It's far from 'lol' you were reared, boy" (darraghmac), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:21 (thirteen years ago) link
like, HOLY SHIT "Custom Profile Layouts"! man, just want I've always been looking for! (custom profile layout for **what**? and what the fuck does this have to do with Radiohead playing "High and Dry" on Jools Holland in the mid-90s?)
― markers, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:22 (thirteen years ago) link
ok then the video ends and some audio starts up advertising American Military University
― markers, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:23 (thirteen years ago) link
none of that has anything to do with Radiohead, and the chances that someone watching the same video I was watching would actually click on any of that shit is zero. if anything, I'll probably be more apt to just associate whatever brands pop up randomly with this stuff with spammy activity in general
― markers, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 17:24 (thirteen years ago) link