Coming in December: A new Star+ subscription
It has a few different names: The metered system, the all-platform-access program, the digital subscription, but mostly folks just call it The Paywall.
Later this year, The Kansas City Star will join hundreds of other news operations in moving to whatever it is you’d like to call it. Essentially, we’re going to charge a little bit for people to get our digital content, but you’ll be able to access it in a multitude of ways.
So, beginning on Dec. 5, The Star is adding all of our digital subscription products for our home delivery subscribers so that you will be able to enjoy one inclusive print and digital “Star+” subscription package.
Now, I understand that being charged for something that you’ve gotten for free isn’t fun. But providing unlimited access across all platforms for a small amount makes good sense.
This all-access way of packaging our content addresses the new ways people come to us, and provides incredible flexibility for readers.
Readers will have unlimited access to our suite of digital products, including kansascity.com, e-Star replica edition, mobile sites, digital back-issues and archive databases. This provides subscribers with access on smart phones, tablets, PCs and more. With e-Star — our digital replica of The Star’s print edition — articles, photographs, even in-paper ads and crossword puzzles, can be emailed, printed and saved.
I recognize that charging even a few cents more isn’t necessarily popular, but we hope you’ll recognize that it is a logical strategy to enable us to provide quality local news and information in the increasingly myriad ways people reach us.
We are glad more people than ever read The Kansas City Star, as technology continues to enable us to reach more people in new ways. Thank you for reading and for helping us continue to serve and grow in this community, as we have for more than 131 years.
Mi-Ai Parrish is president and publisher of The Star.
Joe Gallagher
6 months, 4 weeks agoWhat is really insulting is to tease subscribers like me with weasel words like “a few cents more”. I have been considering dropping my subscription, mostly because of repeated delivery issues (delivering during a stop, no paper delivered), and it isn’t going to take much of an increase to get me to drop my subscription. I rarely access kansascity.com, because it is hard to find anything and way inferior to many other newspapers’ free websites. But the main thing is that they are telling this without being willing to give us all of the information. Will my subscription cost go up. Will I have to pay more for the web info or will the fact I already subscribe allow me access. Quit stalling and give up the real facts. Why make the announcement before you give out the information that matters? Are you waiting to see how much blowback you get?
Yael T. Abouhalkah
6 months, 4 weeks agoJoe: Please look at the bottom of the article. I posted the online Q&A about Star+, which I hope does address your concerns. Thanks for reading.
Joe Gallagher
6 months, 4 weeks agoHey, Thanks! So this means I pay a dime a day (69 cents weekly) to get unlimited articles and commenting ability? Of course, if this is like other papers, such as New York Times and Lincoln Journal Star, you can get your limit for each browser, so if I continue to use Safari, Firefox, and Chrome, I can get 45 a month, or actually, every rolling 30 days. Not a problem, in that I rarely go over 15, and never comment. Thanks again for the clarification.
Charles Purvis
6 months, 4 weeks agoGood luck with your new business model.
For the same reason I dropped my subscription, I will not be paying to access the electronic version. Simply put, I am not going to pay to support an newspaper utterly devoted to liberalism.
Steven Fetter
66223
6 months, 4 weeks agoHow about the poor and disadvantaged of our community? They will be entering a informational desert and will not have access to news that effects their well being.
I think that the cold-hearted, profit at any cost, KC Star corporation should offer free access to those individuals that cannot afford $120 a year subscription.
Perhaps the Star should also consider an additional assessment for any Republican that subscribes. The rational is that those few of us left have addiction problems tied to coffee and newsprint each morning. We probably aren’t going away no matter how poorly we are treated. Sort of like smokers and the cigarette tax.
I wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, how many liberals would support a Fox News type morning daily?
William R. Nelson
6 months, 4 weeks agoMy only question to Mr. Parrish is ‘What took you so long?’
JR Beillenhouser
6 months, 3 weeks agoI will not be subscribing to this service, and I suspect that most kansas citians will not either.
I love getting the paper, and I love that KC has a newspaper. But I do not support you anymore. I used to, but I will no longer pay for a service that is so out of touch with it’s audience. I would in a heartbeat if you simply provided a 50-50 balance on your editorial board.
Your inability to properly represent your audience and their views is killing your sales. I know of a great number of people who feel the same way as me and do not buy your product for that reason.
I don’t understand why you would put the life of your paper in jeopardy over your political philosophy. You will not be in business in 5 years because of your decisions.
Kevin F. Casey
6 months, 3 weeks agoFox 4 ran a poll on this & it looks like 90% of Kansas City DOES NOT want this. But hey what do WE know what WE want right? Well come December 5th I will be removing all bookmarks to the Star I will not buy it I will NOT accept it as I DO NOT NEED IT. I have the Internet. Maybe this will be the final nail in this paper’s coffin.
Rachel Elaine Hines
6 months, 3 weeks agoI’ll be here, since I’m apparently one of the 1 percent who can afford ten bucks a month for my subscription. LOL To the haters: Don’t let the screen door hit you where the good Lord split you. I’m sure you’ll find a home with all the other haters at Free Republic.
Michael Peregrine
6 months, 3 weeks agoWhen the New York Times rolled out a similar (hotly debated) program, it offered readers ten articles a month before hitting the pay wall. Does the Star have similar plans?
We all realize the reason this is happening. Simply, print media have not been able to keep up with changing demand in the Internet age. To stay competitive, it’s not just about charging money, it’s about having a better and more useful product to readers which cannot be obtained elsewhere. People have largely divorced themselves from print media for several reasons: local news is often depressing, uninteresting, and largely colored by opinion.
Everyone is free to determine whether or not it is truly worth it to pay for online content. I will miss some of the Star’s content, but frankly I find that it is not the place for breaking news. Information breaks first on Twitter and then local television sites. Recently, when I wanted to find out the source of loud booms in my neighborhood, I did not come to the Star’s website. I went to Twitter, where I found lots of people talking about what was going on in the neighborhood. Are these people trained journalists? Hardly. Were they accurate about what they were observing outside their windows? Yes.
Initiating a pay wall is an enormous gamble. There is a lot to lose, and the loss is inevitable. Print media will never keep up with the digital revolution, and we still don’t know what the next phase of that revolution will even look like yet.
There are plenty of pay wall alternatives. Just a couple include:
Google News - my personal favorite. Simply set up news alerts for Kansas City (or Google “Kansas City news” and click the news link) and you’re good to go. Multiple news sources, all local, all free.
The blogosphere - you’re taking chances on the quality of content, but if you know where to go and who to pay attention to, you’ve got more than enough accurate, local information. Biased? Yes, probably. More biased than the paper? Hmmm.
I feel like this decision will backfire. It is NOT the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times. And people are already up to their eyeballs in online accounts for this that and the other thing. Who needs yet another one? Pay walls amount to nothing more than a short term fix for long term problems in this industry … a step backward, not forward … and a great way for the Star to limit its audience.
There will always be loyal readers (the ones who have been around for ten or more years and who are committed to readership). But the big question for the Star is: where are your NEW readers and YOUNG audience going to come from? They will not be paying customers.
Don’t get me wrong … I sympathize with the Star and see this is the passing of an age. But ages do tend to pass, don’t they.
Kelly Adrian
6 months, 3 weeks agoWhile I understand the pressure to charge for your content, I will just find the news somewhere else…for free. That’s the present and the future. It’s a shame, because I like the KC Star but if I need something local, all I need is access to Twitter. (I jest, but it’s true)
I truly do encourage leadership to seek revenue in different ways. I hope this was the last option on the table.
Best, Former KC Star reader
Joel Shaw
6 months, 3 weeks agoIt’s a good idea, I believe a focus on local content will be even more important. Twitter is only 140 char. and I like reading professional reporting. Recycling national news stories isn’t going to make me pay, the business section and information on local events will. Also, I prefer to pick up a paper rather than deal with the layout and adds of the current site. I would be pleased if greeted by an improved interface upon paying for a full subscription online.