Annoying little logo

[MIJB#19]

As of lately, to me this <img src="http://espn.go.com/i/in.gif" border="0"> has become one of the most annoying logo's on the internet.

It's always situated next to sentences like "Whispers around the NFL", "players to watch on offense", "Draft Big Board Top 100"...

[Masked]

"Whispers" is available free at http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/The+Way+We+Hear+It/Whispers/default.htm

[MIJB#19]

True, but still this logo is annoying...

[MIJB#19]

Originally read at Pro Football Weekly dot com (http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Subscribe/Login.htm?ArticleID=%7B3C396055%2DE792%2D4513%2D8E4F%2D84D43159DF6A%7D):
The content you are trying to view is premium content. Please log in to view this content. If you do not have a login, you will need to subscribe below. If you are already logged in, then your active subscription(s) do not allow for viewing this type of content and you will have to upgrade to one of the subscription types listed below in order to access this content.:eek:

[mckerney]

And I believe that more than half of their 'exclusive' content is just linking to other sites.

[Darkiller]

I agree wholeheartedly MIJB.
I see it more and more and it's sooooooo frustrating !

[Honolulu_Blue]

I dig it.

[cthomer5000]

Related question, is everything in the college football section exclusive? There is seriously almost NO content that a non-member can read. Just a couple news items.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Suck it up. Become a member. Good times had by all. The money goes to a worthy cause, up-to-the-minute sports news 24/7.

[Marmel]

It is annoying because you can't get something for free?

[JeeberD]

I get it for free... :D

[korme]

Originally posted by Marmel
It is annoying because you can't get something for free?


uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


yeah, that about sums it up

[MIJB#19]

Hey, we pay for our internet connection, isn't that enough already? Besides, why should a radio/tv company like ESPN hide their internet information behind a subscribe-first system?

Also, why should one pay for such low quality, or are you telling me the Insider pages are not loaded with spelling errors?
In fact, if I recall correctly, a customer who buys something to read can demand that the thing they buy does not have spelling errors, or grammatical errors.

Basically, they are not doing so much wrong, but the way they are quietly hiding one section more per day, all seems so, I don't know, like: "we want them to subscribe, and if they don't, we continue hiding more and more pages."

[Subby]

Silly Europeans and there stupid Socialist ideals...

;)

[Anrhydeddu]

Hey, we pay for our internet connection, isn't that enough already?

That's really funny, even when knowing that you were serious. I guess an analogy would be that you pay taxes to build roads to stores but then you expect the stores to sell their goods for free?

[albionmoonlight]

Why give it away free if people will pay for it?

I find myself going to profootball weekly and cnnsi.com more because of the annoyance of the ESPN insider content.

However, I am sure that their bean counters have done the math and they are making more on people signing up for insider then they are losing by people going to other web pages. It's all about the $$$.

[Subby]

ESPN Insider content is completely worth it.

Pony up or shut the fuck up, as my grandmother is fond of saying...

[Cuckoo]

Wow, your grandmother is a frightening woman.

[tucker342]

It seems like every worthwhile article on the ESPN website is an insider article, it pisses me off.

[MIJB#19]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
That's really funny, even when knowing that you were serious. I guess an analogy would be that you pay taxes to build roads to stores but then you expect the stores to sell their goods for free? No, I was not serious, at least not on paying for the internet connection.
I realise that when you want more, you have to pay more.

My true beef was in the last alinea, they are silently hiding more and more articles.
It almost forces one to subscribe, if you want to read everything.
Maybe I'm just jealous that they finally got smart and let people actually pay for things they were giving away for free.

And as Masked pointed out with the "whispers" example, it doesn't sound very nice to let people pay for reading articles they can read for free at other websites...

If people take it for granted that such things happen, go ahead.
I was just wondering if more people were annoyed by this tendency.

That, and that logo on itself is annoyingly enough.:rolleyes: