Thursday, October 04, 2012

Is the Enquirer Delaying Print Stories From the Web, Again?

Since I ponied up and paid for an online subscription to the Enquirer, I thought I would read their front page headline on the print edition to see how they spun the news from last night.

What I saw to the left of the front page headline was another, smaller, front page story with the headline of "NAACP election will be battle." I read the article and thought, hmm, that would be a good story to link to on Cincinnati Blog.

That's basically how news blogging goes. You read other articles and link to them, adding your own take on the subject, often reacting to article itself.

So, I start to look for the article on the Enquirer website. There's not a Local News section.  That kinda sucks.  So I check around all the sections, including the Latest Headlines section, and  I can't find it. I do several searches for the article using the Enquirer's web search function. I can't find it. I go to Google and search on an exact sentence from the article including someone's name. I STILL can't find it. Maybe it was just a hiccup with their new paywall system, I don't know, but I like to find things I know are supposed to exist when I search for them.

So I gave up looking and had a different blog post than I was planning on writing.

Has the Enquirer gone back to a "print only exclusive" model?  Has it had that for a while and as a web only reader I am just now seeing the delay?  That's possible.  I kind of would have thought that such a delay would GO AWAY with the advent of an online subscription model, but maybe not.

It is still early in the morning and the article may pop up before I publish this post, but I was annoyed, therefore I am writing about it.  That's another way blogging happens, you get pissed off about something, so you blog about it.  Kinda simple, but it works for me.

1 comment:

  1. It's up now.
    Does your subscription get the PDF version, too? I know it's not the same...
    Looks like every letter is considered a 'feature article', too.
    sheesh
    Anyway,
    "Smitherman said he removed Richardson Jr. as the chapter’s attorney because he promoted a Democratic Party agenda. Smitherman then brought in Christopher Finney" - who, what? has no partisan agenda?!?!?.

    ReplyDelete

Don't be an idiot or your post will be deleted.