Comments on: WaPo Subscribers: Do you really want TV Week?

By: Tom Sobotka

Tom Sobotka — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:47:01 +0000

Dear TV Week......In this week's issue of TV Week (6/20-26,2010), which I understand will cost an additional $0.15 per month, I could not find the usual Crossword puzzle nor the directory to the different features/sections of the TV Week.

It was my understanding that the Crossword puzzle would still be included in the updated, enlarged TV Week section.

I would have sent this directly to "Debra" who signed the website article - "WaPo Subscribers: Do you really want TV Week? Posted by Erik Wemple on Feb. 9, 2009 at 04:32 pm, and requested questions be e-mailed to her but did not include her e-mail address.

By: John Kelly

John Kelly — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:43:14 +0000

Ludicrous - is my thought to this policy. If I ask and pay for a subscription to a newspaper, I should get that complete newspaper. If I don't want parts of the paper...yes let me opt-out to assist in reducing your newspaper circulation requirements. Next you will be offering to take away classifieds, advertisements from stores or maybe even the sports section and force me to opt-in to get them. Totally unbelievable that I must tell you - I want what I already paid for. Thankfully I chose to contact your subscription service and "opt in" today to understand why I've been frustrated over non-receipt since tv week assists me, WITHOUT DUPLICATION, as I'm only a sunday subscriber. Even if you had this policy...how is it duplication to me... I'm glad you all think it's a great program - but to me it lacks common sense.

By: JB

JB — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:05:22 +0000

Greg: Does being 36 make me a senior citizen? We use TV Week at our house because we don't get the TV Guide channel via Comcast. And even if we did, it's nice to be able to look at what's coming up without changing channels. And the TV Guide channel is super annoying in the way it takes about 15 minutes to scroll through the channels. THANK YOU, CITY PAPER! I would not have known about this dumb plan but not for you. (You'd think the Post would've mentioned it with a flyer in the inserts, but no such luck.)

By: Greg Andrew

Greg Andrew — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:18:24 +0000

This isn't an innovative move; a number of newspapers around the country have started doing this during the last several years - e.g., The Denver Post.

I'm sure both Posts would like to totally eliminate their TV Week, but they fear the negative reaction they'll get from thousands of senior citizens who rely on those publications. TV networks and stations just don't do any print advertising anymore, so the economic rationale for the weekly books and even daily listings is long dead.

By: Dave McKenna

Dave McKenna — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 23:43:16 +0000

As a six-year paperboy for the washington post way back when (my journalism career peaked early), i feel confident in saying that whoever came up with this idea, and anybody who thinks it's a good idea, was never a six-year paperboy for the washington post. with inserts, it's gotta be all or nothing. multiple versions of the daily paper will only lead to confusion and complaints and a quick scrapping of the program.

By: J

Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:12:54 +0000

Its actually a smart idea. If only they would do the same with Book World and the already defunct Sunday Source...