Build The Wall analysis

Section 1

This section spoke about the New York Times and the Washington Post's publishers and how they have the power to change to save "high-end journalism" and how the internet is to blame for the recent failure in print and newspaper companies.

Section 2

In this section, its was shown to the readers, the different avenues that could be explored by the Washington Post and the New York Tomes as they try to win back the profits for all newspaper companies as those to are the major ones, meaning they have the ability to change the industry.

Section 3
In this section, there was a bit of reminiscing going on about the way the internet use to be, a little business plan. Also, in this section it talked about different ways to make profit, such as putting the hard copy price up, which makes readers go online and pay for a subscription which is cheaper.

Section 4

This section is about what would happen to the Washington Post and the New York Times if they were going to go online and paywall in the future

David Simon's overall argument 
I think David Simon believes in order for the newspaper business to move forward, they need to embrace and adapt to the new online subscription. In order to make profit, he believes the newspaper companies need to increase their prices of hard copies and have a cheaper price for online subscriptions, allowing them to make profit either way. He also believes, that if the Washington Post or the New York Times does something, other newspaper companies will follow, therefore they have the power to make other people do the same thing as the two major newspapers, therefore leaving a bit of hope for the newspaper industry. Simon also shows us how realistic having a paywall can be if the quality if the newspaper is the same. He feels that the quality of newspaper needs to increase if they want to have a successful paywall because there are other news sites such as BBC which offer content for free. Also, he feels that if all newspapers have a paywall, meaning that there is very few sources to get free news, the newspaper industry can thrive, but only if they do all so. He also feels that the big, known newspapers will get all the profits, because the news is near enough the same, and whats the point of subscribing to tow or more newspapers with the same content, as you can save money on only subscribing to a large newspaper, which has all the main stories from smaller newspapers. 

Comments

"You must both also individually inform the wire-service consortiums that unless they limit membership to publications, online or off, that provide content only through paid subscriptions, you intend to withdraw immediately from those consortiums."

So wire services would no longer be allowed to provide content to TV and radio stations?

This comment, is spot on because without wire services giving content to the TV, there would be no TV news and news channels. With this being said, there would be no way to receive the news unless you have subscribed, which is very silly, because some people may not be able to subscribe.

"A monopoly! Exactly the right way to go - can I get some fries with that? "
This is true to a certain extent because if all paywall prices are the same, people are more inclined to buy the more well known newspaper, meaning only one or two newspaper companies will recive sales for their newspaper online.

"Let's see if I understand the major points here:

Only the New York Times and the Washington Post matter.

No real journalism gets done outside print newspapers.

The regional papers all stink and deserve to die.

The AP must kick out the broadcasters and dump the commercial customers, or die.

If we engineer a mass suicide by the entire newspaper industry, kill the Associated Press, strangle the broadcasters and continue to pretend that the rest of the world doesn't exist, we'll ensure the perpetuation of the 1980s Washington Post-New York Times news empire so they can hire 10 reporters in St. Louis.

Did I get the gist of it?"

This person is too extreme, therefore I don't agree with what is saying, because he has taken a childish approach to rebut Simon.
My opinion
I think that paywall seems like a good idea, as long as all newspapers do it, if not, they will not make money if there is online news going out for free. I will not pay for news, due to my disposible income, and because i can use BBC news to get news for free and it is a news source that is unbiased.