Find an event

Peek-a-boo: Sun-Times shrinks behind online paywall

Posted in Robert Feder | Chicago Media blog by Robert Feder on Dec 7, 2011 at 12:00am

It might have been nice if someone had told Roger Ebert about the Chicago Sun-Times online paywall, since he happens to be the newspaper’s No. 1 star and top draw for its website. But when I reached out to the esteemed movie critic late Tuesday, it was the first he’d heard about the plan, which goes into effect Thursday.

“As of now I don’t know how it will affect rogerebert.com or, for that matter, my blog,” he told me in an email exchange. A few minutes later, he followed up: “I’ve been informed by [publisher] John Barron that my site and blog will not be part of the online subscription plan.”

(Update: On Wednesday, Ebert wrote to say that he was informed months ago — "so long ago that I had forgotten" — and that he supports the newspaper's paywall plan. "I wish the Sun-Times well in this venture." See comment below.)

So at least Ebert’s fans can relax.

One day after another wave of cuts swept through the Sun-Times editorial department — and a week after reports surfaced of the newspaper’s possible sale — its parent company announced plans to begin charging for access to content on suntimes.com and affiliated sites. After the first 20 page views every 30 days, readers will be required to pay $6.99 a month (or $77.87 a year) for continued access. Home delivery subscribers will be charged $1.99 a month.

“We think the time is long overdue for us to begin charging for our content,” said Sun-Times Media chairman and CEO Jeremy Halbreich, who first floated the idea publicly more than two years ago. “It is certainly award-winning content and we need to find new ways to support it.”

Since September, the suburban Daily Herald has been charging a toll for its online product after 15 page views a month, but this marks the first time a Chicago metropolitan daily has erected a paywall. Also included in the Sun-Times Media group are the SouthtownStar, Aurora Beacon-News, Elgin Courier-News, Joliet Herald-News, Lake County News-Sun, Post-Tribune of Merrillville, Indiana, and more than 30 area weeklies.

Will readers be willing to pay for the digital Sun-Times and its suburban siblings as they continue to shrink in size and scope? Especially as long as the Chicago Tribune and other news sites still offer their online content for free?

“I would hate for my reviews to go behind a paywall,” Ebert wrote in an impassioned blog post in March 2010. “I have around 10,000 of them . . . Now here they all are online, being read every day from virtually everyplace in earth. One in Yemen, one in Pago Pago, it adds up. Daniel from Pago Pago is a valued commenter on the blog. Think how great that makes me feel. If I go behind a paywall, however, and a high school student in Mexico is doing some research, there are lots of other excellent critics on the web, and everybody knows it.” (Thanks to Huffington Post for the reference.)

You have to wonder about the timing of all this, too. Five more newsroom veterans just joined dozens of other recent exiles from the Sun-Times editorial ranks. Features writer Mary Houlihan, photographer Jean Lachat and graphic artist Greg Good were laid off Monday. They closely followed the voluntary departures of food editor Janet Rausa Fuller and copy editor Frank Sugano. All of them I knew to be top-notch professionals. None of their positions will be filled.

The dean of the Post-Tribune’s newsroom, editorial page editor Rich James, also was laid off this week. The total number of layoffs companywide was not disclosed, but Halbreich told Crain’s Chicago Business that they were the “final piece” of 18 months of reductions.

“We’re still waiting for word on how many 10th floor manager types were axed,” one Sun-Times insider quipped as the firings were being carried out. “Might be waiting quite a while.”

Halbreich won’t say whether the company is profitable and insists that there are no discussions to sell it, although reports persists that at least one investor group is preparing to make an offer. The group, led by Michael Ferro Jr.’s Chicago-based Merrick Ventures, already has a stake in the Chicago News Cooperative.

Previous post
Next post
12/07/2011
Share with your network
Comment
Comments
Who pulls the plug first, The Chicago Sun Times or the Steve Dahl Dahlcast Network?
By Good Luck With That (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 12:03 am
"Final piece" of reductions my a**. There'll be more layoffs in the next three months, I'll predict. For an extensive, detailed list of all the Sun-Times' past layoffs and other weird employee-related incidents, go to this page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Sun-Times
By Barney Schukraft (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 12:22 am
I hadn't heard about Mary Houlihan, I've been meaning to send her an email at ST this week. We loved her Patio Theater story at the new Regulus Coffee Cafe and new Thrift & Thrive by Patio and we all wanted to thank her.
By Tony P. (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 12:32 am
What an incredibly short sighted move- destined to lead to the ultimate demise of the whole Sun Times. Their site is so crammed with pop up ads, that it's slow to load even for fast connections- and now they want to squeeze online readers? Yeah, alienating readers and trying to nickle and dime who's left- that'll work long term. Not.
By ghostofWally (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 12:32 am
They won't be getting a dime of my money. There is an embarrassment of riches when it comes to good journalism on the web, and enough of it Chicago-based that I don't feel the need to pay. I put up with enough ads that my visits are surely profitable already. Also, $6.99 every 4 weeks does not equal $6.99 a month. It works out to around $7.60 a month.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 1:16 am
I took the Daily Herald off my desktop when it became a pay site and have not visited since. I generally don't use the Sun-Times because it's so slow to load. Sadly, I think newspaper executives will look back in horror a few years from now and realize that their move to pay-per-view assisted the papers' demise. In less than five years, this will be a one-paper town.
By James Dvorak (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 3:24 am
First time? I could have sworn that the Chicago Tribune started with a paywall that it later abandoned.
By Anony Mouse (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 3:52 am
Charge print subscribers? Chutzpah! NYT has a metered paywall, but they don't charge print subscribers. IIRC, they charge about what the Sun-Times charges. What the Sun-Times offers is not on the level of the NYT.
By The Nudnik (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 6:05 am
I doubt the sun-times is going anywhere, journalists need to be paid, and with ad revenue down, you gotta charge, everybody will eventually.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 6:28 am
The folks running the web site at the Sun Times are, unfortunately, not the ones making these sorts of decisions. The ones who make these boneheaded decisions, like the move to a non-locally hosted solution, are still blind to the value of the web product that they produce. A paywall is a "cheap" and lazy way to monetize a website and more likely it's a "What the hell can we do to make money off of this thing" reaction rather than a decision based on merit of content. In the long run, the site is just going to suffer even more. To add insult to the injury, I wouldn't be surprised to see that same hosting provider bungle to operation at least once.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 6:31 am
Won't work...they're not "must have" i.e WSj or NYT
By marc schacher (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 6:45 am
I, for one, will gladly pay for Stella's mention of the birthdays of Lola Falana, Tom Dreesen, Tom Landry, Channel 5's Phil Rogers, Ludacris, Kristy McNichol, Tommy Shaw, Amy Madigan and Paul "Bear" Bryant.
By bruce wolf (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 7:16 am
i just go to starbucks and read all the papers for free...
By rjdjr (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 7:22 am
No one is going to pay..bye bye suckers. By the way, Steve Dahl was mentioned above..what ever happened to him? ...Never mind
By Sally G (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 7:23 am
Reduced rate for the elderly or perhaps "seniors read free"?
By Rich Samuels (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 7:46 am
Will "Luann" be behind the paywall? -- MrJM
By MrJM (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 8:07 am
This is the end of the Sun Times. I check on-line every morning before I leave and pick up the paper with my morning coffee, which I have done for over 40 years. I will not pay for it's content on-line. The papers content has shrunk. We'll be lucky to have any newspaper left in Chicago in 5 years. Good Bye Sun Times, it was nice to have you for as long as we have.
By Bill (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 8:47 am
AND it comes just days after a memo from the same folks notifying employees that vacation days will now be given out on a quarterly basis. Meaning come Jan. 1, you'll have 3 or 4 days and in April, another 3 or 4, or whatever it is you're owed by seniority. Why? So that if you are laid off, STNG doesn't owe you a full year's vacation - just a quarter of the year. Now that gives GREAT confidence in long-term survival.
By Little Hope (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 8:49 am
It's time to sell the paper to a group with deep pockets, rework the content by featuring columnists people want to read (dump Jesse,Neil, etc), add more feet to the street, give the editorial page a conservative slant and beef up the business section.
By Ken (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:03 am
Some real smart business practices at work here... First give something away for free than start charging people for it? No wonder this company continues to go down the tubes.
By Layed off SouthtownStar editorial employee... (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:10 am
No big deal for me...I quit buying the SunTimes on a daily basis when they bounced Feder. I WOULD buy it every once in a while because as a crossword fan, the SunTimes crosswords are light years ahead of the Trib as far as challenges go. Now the SunTimes presents itself as only marginally better than a paper one would buy at a diner in a rural town.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:18 am
"By Layed off SouthtownStar editorial employee..." From the usage here, seems like the paper come off better for the layoff...
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:22 am
It isn't true that the Sun-Times didn't inform me. Actually, we discussed this some months ago--so long ago that I had forgotten, and so your email caught me by surprise. I believe some kind of pay system is obligatory for the web. Content cannot be produced for nothing. The reason I opted out is that so many of my readers are not in Chicago (25% are outside the United States), and would not want to subscribe to the CST just to read me. I wish the Sun-Times well in this venture. I am subscribing myself. Jeremy would be mistaken not to try a pay plan. He treated me with every courtesy in contacting me at the beginning, and I want to apologize. I was caught off guard by the timing of the announcement.
By Roger Ebert (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:34 am
People deserve to get paid for their work and there should be no obligation to provide services at a loss or for free. The cost to operate a major local newsroom is high. Unfortunately, the cost per impression on the web is far too low to sustain professional and responsible news gathering like metro newspapers provide on a local scale. I like getting things for free as much as anybody but the reality is there's a cost to everything.
By ozzieballforevernot (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:57 am
It's about time to charge. Subscribers should get free access, but charge a fee for everyone else. Maybe if the Sun-Times had done that years ago, Feder would still be there and so would I and so many other capable journalists. No executives are being cut, but instead plenty of the real producers of news. What an incompetent, poorly run company
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:59 am
I agree with the growing sentiment in the industry that quality content deserves to be paid for. If 10 years ago, you shelled out $2 a week to buy your local paper, you should pay for the content you get on the web now. BUT the quality of the CST content in print and online is a pathetic shell of what it used to be, event 5-6 years ago, and their website is frankly, far below average. The reason the NYT has been successful is a no-brainer; their website is the best newspaper website in America, inarguably. People will pay for quality design and functionality, boots on the ground reporting, vivid original video/photo galleries, strong columnist viewpoint, etc etc etc. The CST is, sadly, rapidly, slipping into an abyss on that very simple front.
By Jeff (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 11:02 am
Well that's 15 minutes of my life I'll reclaim everyday. Thanks, Sun-Times!
By TJ Clawmute (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 11:17 am
"By Layed off SouthtownStar editorial employee..." From the usage here, seems like the paper come off better for the layoff... By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 9:22 am Hilarious. Indeed, the last talent left that newsroom a couple of years ago. And apparently the last people who were literate in English left sometime before this guy.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 11:20 am
All of the Sun-Times bashers are forgetting one of the main reasons for its past and current success…SPORTS. Chicago is a huge Sports market, and the Sun-Times Sports section is still arguable the best in town. The columnists do a great job of expressing what the average fan is thinking, and the reporting and beat coverage is strong and plentiful. Chicagoans remain hungry for all they can learn about our teams and the people playing for and running those teams. This alone should be enough to support the Sun-Times print and online versions for a long time to come.
By RB (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 11:46 am
Award winning content? Can you really claim that after those responsible for the award winning are gone? Oh wait, forgot about Ebert. That's one. Anony Mouse, the Trib did have a pay wall at first -- that's how I ended up at the Sun-Times site. In fact, I never went back to realize that the Trib had dropped it, so thanks for that -- I'm off to the Trib for my sports and not waiting till the ST wall goes into effect.
By Nose Furr Ahtu (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 11:47 am
The Sun-Times is extremely short sighted. I've been subscribing for 20+ years through all their bone-headed decisions. Yesterday I turned to the S-T on line to see what happened at the Blago trial. I'm sure they're aware I can go elsewhere for breaking news. If memory serves me correct, those who subscribe to the New York Times get the whole internet version for free. Although the S-T is hardly in the same league as the NY Times, you'd think they'd give subscribers free access also. Not a smart decision.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 11:55 am
Want to make the Sun-Times readable?? Get rid of that moron Jesse ( I father kids out-of-wedlock) Jackson. No paper having that idiot as a columnist can have any credibilty
By paul (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 11:59 am
It'd be great to institute a paywall right before part 2 of some massive expose that everybody wants to read, but that kind of timing is hard to plan for -- especially when the paper's as anemic as it is. But if there's a genuine loss of revenue from people who would otherwise subscribe opting to read it online for free, then paywall it is. (Although tacking extra on people who already DO subscribe makes no sense.) I want the ST to survive. Mostly, I want somebody running the place to realize that they have to invest in the product -- the actual journalism -- or else everything else is a waste of time. The layoffs this week don't bode well.
By Chris Whitehead (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 12:19 pm
Why is it the announcement that something that is currently free will now cost money causes such an uproar. It is purely an economic decision which will force the consumer to decide whether or not the product is worth buying. There continues to be a movement in our world to value various forms of information from websites to apps to books. The current product put on the web by the Sun Times is probably worth what they are getting for it. If they want to charge for it, it would serve them well to improve the product.
By Stuart (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 12:47 pm
@Stuart: I don't believe the uproar is solely based on the decision to charge for content, rather, due to cuts in other areas, the content is no longer seen as valuable as it once was. Personally, I find the pricing outrageous, even for a subscriber, which I was for years; "was" being the operative term.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 1:18 pm
@Nose Furr Ahtu --- They won the Pulitzer this year. The three guys who won are still on staff.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 2:11 pm
While I don't like them, I can understand the business reasons behind instituting a paywall. What I can't understand is the need to charge those who already subscribe to the print edition(s). Those who continue to subscribe to printed works in spite of the wealth of information available on the Internet should be rewarded, not squeezed more. Also, I'm bummed that my neighboring communities local Blotters will no longer be available to me.
By Heather Benton (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 2:15 pm
Ironic, hot off the presses and please not what paper doesn't even possess an honorable mention: APSE honors top newspaper sports websites Dec. 7, 2011, 11:11 a.m. CST AP The Associated Press Sports Editors is honoring 60 newspapers' sports websites in the third year of its Web contest. Out of 125 entries, a Top 10 and 10 additional honorable mention winners were selected in three divisions: over 2 million unique visitors during a month; 500,000-1.9 million unique visitors during a month; and under 500,000 unique visitors during a month. The sites were judged over two dates, selected at random. Results announced Tuesday: OVER 2 MILLION Boston Globe; Chicago Tribune; Minneapolis Star-Tribune; New York Daily News; New York Times; Oklahoman; Palm Beach Post; South Florida Sun-Sentinel; Washington Post; USA Today Honorable mention Baltimore Sun; Detroit News; Kansas City Star; Los Angeles Times; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel; Newsday; Orlando Sentinel; St. Louis Post-Dispatch; St. Petersburg Times; Philly.com ___ 500,000 TO 1.9 MILLION Buffalo News; Cleveland Plain Dealer; Columbus Dispatch; Dallas Morning News; Omaha World Herald; Raleigh News and Observer; Salt Lake Tribune; Tampa Tribune; Toronto Globe and Mail; Tulsa World Honorable mention Charlotte Observer; Columbia State; Arlington Heights (Ill.) Daily Herald; Des Moines Register; Florida Times Union; Green Bay Press Gazette; Knoxville News Sentinel; Lexington Herald Leader; Times Herald-Record; Wisconsin State Journal ___ UNDER 500,000 Beaumont Enterprise; Bloomington Herald News; Decatur Herald and Review; DeKalb Daily Chronicle; Eugene Register Guard; Honolulu Star-Advertiser; Lawrence Journal-World; Northwest Herald; Quad City Times; Tuscaloosa News Honorable mention Augusta Chronicle; Bellingham Herald; Casper Star-Tribune; Glens Falls Post Star; Lewiston Sun Journal; Marin Independent Journal; Medford Mail Tribune; Southeast Missourian; Spartanburg Herald-Journal; Yakima Herald-Republic
By Michael Guzman (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 2:35 pm
Just heard about the new paywall at the Sun-Times. My only question: How much are they paying people to read the ragsheet? $2 a day and I'll sign on. That's $732 in my pocket next year.
By Eddy Zee (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 2:41 pm
Well, if you all *really* want to pay up for the Sun-Times' paywall, then God bless you -- more power to you. But, here's the list of talented journalists whose work you *won't* be reading behind that paywall (or seeing photos shot by), since *all* of the below individuals have left or been pushed out in the last few years: Christine Ledbetter, Debra Pickett, Gary Wisby, Cindy Richards, Maureen Jenkins, Jim Frost, Ron Rapoport, Wynne Delacoma, Joe Goddard, Mary Cameron Frey, Bob Black, Henry Kisor, Dan Miller, Robert Feder, Marcia Frellick, Cheryl L. Reed, Michael Gillis, Lloyd Sachs, Michelle Stevens, S. Jennifer Hunter, Lisa Lenoir, Avis Weathersbee, Robert C. Herguth, Nancy Moffett, Jim Ritter, Russell Churchill Bath, Esther J. Cepeda, Leonard N. Fleming, Ben Goldberger, Susan Hogan/Albach, Chris Whitehead, Howard Wolinsky, Sally Duros, Dan Jedlicka, Doug Elfman, Leslie Baldacci, Dan Haar, Deborah Douglas, Eric Herman, Steve Patterson, Greg Couch, Laura Castro, Jay Mariotti, Teresa Puente, Zay Smith, Jim DeRogatis, Jim O'Donnell, Delia O'Hara, Len Ziehm, Carol Slezak, Steve Tucker, Misha Davenport, Cheryl Jackson, Lewis Lazare, Celeste Busk, John Jackson, Bill Cunniff, Jeff Johnson, John Grochowski, Char Searl, Paige Wiser, Mike Mulligan, Elliott Harris, Keith Hale, Pat Bruno, Janet Rausa Fuller and Mary Houlihan. Now tell me again: does anyone here *really* want to pay for that paywall???
By Clyde Warrick (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 2:57 pm
To the naive, "understanding" sheep that have no problem paying for Sun Times online because nothing's free and they have to make money somehow: POP UP ADVERTISING PAYS FOR ONLINE CONTENT! Wake up and get a clue.
By GhostofWallyPhillips (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 3:22 pm
The Post-Tribune laid off Rich James and kept Jerry Davich???????? Sigh. I feel so lucky to be a former journalist. I don't have the stomach for the way the business is run today.
By Annedreya (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 4:12 pm
So I'll get the free REDEYE and/or READER - or these or Trib online - or WBBM-AM or FM news 101 or WLS or WBEZ - or CBS2 or NBC5 or ABC7 or any of the others. SunTimes gets The Sounds - of Silence.
By The Sounds of Silence (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 4:18 pm
Yes, pop up ads do generate extra revenue for websites but the real dollars they generate are actually very small.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 4:26 pm
I don't know if it has changed, but I used to switch browsers when reading the New York Times. I have a bloggers password which she freely hands out. For some reason I still only get 20 reads but I have my own password, which does limit me to 20 reads. I have also used my phone. So as far as I know there are ways around paying.
By Sanford (not verified) on 12/07/2011 at 5:22 pm
Today's the day, the sky is falling!
By Chicken Little (not verified) on 12/08/2011 at 2:52 am
Amid all the changes at the Sun-Times, at least the gay boys club remains firmly in place.
By Jim (not verified) on 12/08/2011 at 6:18 am
-->Thomson demonstrated about 15 years ago that one needs to find a way to make money off the Internet, so I sort of see this. However, with the DEARTH OF ANY REAL NEWS in the STMG publications or the Tribune, I don't see anything worth paying for. I thought that I was adequately supporting them by clicking on the comment links to see what the 85% of those posters who were mentally deficient were posting, but it certainly isn't worth it to pay for that. In fact, I quit subscribing to the local Pioneer Press paper at $1 week when its conception of news came down to Bill Kurtis and Donna LaPietra of Mettawa attending some soiree in Lake Forest. -->As for the Daily Herald, one can pretty much figure out the substance of the story from the free home page. Not worth clicking further. -->For that matter, the only real news of the day is on radio at 2 p.m., and they haven't figured out a way to charge for AM radio yet.
By jack (not verified) on 12/08/2011 at 9:50 am
I might be willing to pay for content on some news sites. But to get me to even think about it, they would have to first promise that in return for payment I would get NO ADS and an extremely reader-friendly browsing experience (to rival what I experience in the paper edition). I never see any of the publishers address this issue. It's probably because they can't admit to anyone that the "free" online reading experience is so obnoxious and out of control what with cluttered pages, slow load times and increasingly more intrusive ad forms. It's a bad enough deal for those who pay nothing; it would be out of the question when real money is involved.
By C (not verified) on 12/09/2011 at 12:42 pm
I have no problem with papers limiting new content - such as todays news - but I'd like to get yesterdays news free.
By Old News (not verified) on 12/09/2011 at 1:50 pm
Although this post is now a few days old, I'd love to know who "Jim" is referring to re: the "gay boys club" at the Sun-Times. Enlighten us, "Jim."
By Mr. Roboto (not verified) on 12/09/2011 at 4:26 pm
More than 300 "blue collar" Sun Times workers have lost their jobs in the last month and there has been no mention of this. These were the employees that worked weekends, holidays and sometimes overnight hours to get the paper out.The Suntimes will no longer be printed at the Ashland AV.plant but will now be printed at the Tribune. Mismanagement ate away at a once vital newspaper that will continue to fade until it is just a memory. Too bad so many long time employees lost their jobs even though they agreed to a pay cut, with the promise by the Suntimes, that they would not loose their jobs if they did this.
By Anonymous (not verified) on 12/11/2011 at 7:12 pm
Have an Opinion? Let's hear it
About Robert Feder
Robert Feder has been keeping tabs on the media for more than three decades, including 28 years as a reporter and television/radio columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times. He's a lifelong Chicagoan and graduate of the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University. At age 14, he founded the first and only Walter Cronkite Fan Club.
Subscribe via e-mail

Browse the archives