Slate.com has an article about a Chicago meeting involving a number of newspaper company executives, including Advance Publications.
The article seems to imply that the executives are in collusion (actually the headline says that) about a common agreement to charge for Internet content.
Some are alleging that would be an anti-trust situation, if true. An embedded link is a really detailed summary of the meeting.
One of my favorite paragraphs:
"There are various ways to go about it, and one size won't fit all. During their days of print advertising plenty, the people in this room, or their predecessors, made the catastrophic, myopic decision to not charge. They gave away their expensive efforts for free. They by and large misjudged the significance of the internet."
Yes they did, and they ignored those of us who questioned the wisdom of such a move. Yet, we are gone and they are still there. Go figure.