Introducing Publisher Extra

Publisher Extra

Many people ask us, “Why don’t you have this or that newspaper? Where can I get access to this newspaper archive?” Many times the answer is: We just don’t have the rights to that newspaper or the publisher still owns the rights to that paper so you will have to contact the publisher. Today we are introducing Publisher ExtraPublisher Extra is a subscription that provides unique access to many newspapers’ archives that are still under copyright with editions as recent as last month. By working directly with publishers, we are now able to provide access to long runs and recent editions of some the most valuable papers out there.  Even if you don’t subscribe to the Publisher Extra subscription, every Basic subscriber will get access to the out-of-copyright* editions for these newly added newspapers as they become available.  For more recent years you will need to upgrade to Publisher Extra. Here is a list of some of the papers available today.

Featured Newspapers with Publisher Extra Issues

Publisher Extra years – Denotes Publisher Extra years available

  • Arizona Republic (1850-1921, Publisher Extra years1923–2015)
  • Cincinnati Enquirer (1841–1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2015)
  • Courier-Journal (1830–1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2015)
  • Des Moines Register (1871–1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2015)
  • Detroit Free Press (1831–1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2015)
  • Indianapolis Star (1903–1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2015)
  • The Poughkeepsie Journal (1785–1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2015)
  • The Tennessean (1812–1922, Publisher Extra years1949–2015)
  • The Pantagraph (1848–1963, Publisher Extra years1964–2013)
  • Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (1786–1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2014)
  • Palm Beach Post (1850-1922, Publisher Extra years1923–2004)
  • The Sydney Morning Herald (1831–1955, Publisher Extra years1956–2015)
  • and many more… See complete list

We are excited to offer this one-of-a-kind subscription for those who are interested in access to longer run newspaper archives that have never been available online before. If you’re a newspaper publisher and would like to know how to work with us to get your newspaper archive online, please contact us.

* Basic subscribers will still have access to the years up through 1922 and in some cases even up through 1963 for these newly added newspapers.

121 thoughts on “Introducing Publisher Extra

  1. Just a quick question. You have one newspaper called Times Recorder. Which Times Recorder? I’m hoping that it’s the Americus Times Recorder. Can you please clarify this.

    Also, I think $100 a year is a bit much for the few that are listed. Most of us are only interested in certain areas. In fact, you have no papers for the majority of places I need them in. Sumter County, Georgia and Kennebec County (with a few that surround it) in Maine.

    I mean, please do not misunderstand me. I’m not complaining mind you. I just would like to see more papers scattered outside larger cities.

  2. I hope that sometime in the future you will add the archives for the Twin City Sentinel from Winston-Salem, NC which was last published around 1985. When that happens I will return as a subscriber.

  3. Could you please add the city to the listing of newspapers in this collection? Some of these are not well known enough to know where they are published.

  4. Kind request. For central Illinois, The Peoria Journal Star and its iterations, would be greatly appreciated. Peoria was and is a major city in Illinois. It covers a large swath of my ancestry. Here’s hoping it comes online soon. Many thanks.

  5. The short listing of papers available and the added $100 is not good fit right now, but as the collection grows so will my interest.

  6. It is an intriguing idea, but I agree with others that 1) add the city name when you list a newspaper; 2) the price is steep considering it is just getting started. I may upgrade later when there are more titles that relate to my family. In the meantime, it would seem a better marketing idea to offer a special one-year introductory price for existing Basic members. By the time that year is up, there should be a lot more papers available to entice renewals.

  7. I’m interested in the publisher extra, but I was thinking about just paying for a month of it to see if I like it, and if it is useful enough for the extra money it costs. If I decide not to keep it, can I cancel and go back down to the basic without losing all the basic subscription clippings I have saved?

    • Yes you can switch to basic. Also, you will never lose your clippings. They will stay with your account always, even if you don’t subscribe anymore.

  8. There’s something not quite right here. I joined in late December with a basic plan which allowed me to access Arizona Republic articles. I just tried to access some of the same articles and suddenly I need the “Publisher Extra” to access them. Is this the old “Bait and Switch” tactic or can you explain this to me? Thanks…..

    • I had the same issue with an article that I’ve read before but now it’s on the Publisher Extra list. What gives?
      Also, if I give up my membership to and upgrade my Ancestry.Com member(which used to be the top level membership but has now been down graded to middle level) will this give me access to “Publisher Extra”??

      • Do you have the following:
        Los Angeles Herald Examiner
        Las Vegas Review-Journal
        Wichita Eagle-Beacon
        Seattle Post-Intelligencer
        Dallas Times Herald
        Cleveland Plain Dealer
        Cleveland Press
        Cleveland News
        Saginaw News
        Flint Journal
        Grand Rapids Press
        Canton Repository
        Dayton Daily News
        Dayton Journal-Herald
        Detroit News
        Denver Post
        San Francisco Chronicle
        San Francisco Examiner
        Toledo Blade
        Rocky Mountain News
        Tulsa World
        Arkansas Gazette
        St. Paul Pioneer Press
        Chicago Sun-Times
        Los Angeles Times
        Buffalo News
        Richmond Times-Dispatch
        Miami Herald
        Youngstown Vindicator
        Kansas City Star
        Kansas City Times
        Baltimore Sun
        Nashville Banner
        San Diego Union-Tribune
        Cincinnati Post
        Charlotte Observer
        San Antonio Light
        Minneapolis Star-Tribune
        The Portland Oregonian
        Cleveland Press
        Tampa Tribune
        Memphis Commercial Appeal
        Memphis Press Scimitar
        Tulsa Tribune
        Akron Beacon-Journal
        Honolulu Advertiser
        Birmingham Post-Herald
        Oxnard Press-Courier
        Sacramento Union
        Philadelphia Bulletin
        Baltimore News-American
        St. Louis Globe-Democrat

  9. I am tempted to subscribe but it is a very high price to pay when you do not have newspapers in Minnesota, very little in Iowa and Kentucky and Indiana. I cannot justify paying that price with a limited amount of newspapers.

  10. The old bait and switch. Ive had a membership for three years and now some of the papers that I had access to have been pulled from me and are now under publisher extra. Nice try for a quick cash grab guys but Ive cancelled my membership as well as Ancestry. I cant abide by such tactics and will simply do it the old fashioned way.

  11. This is a bait and switch! It used to say UNLIMITED access – now we have to pay significantly MORE! Why nor offer subscriptions to individual papers? You should have left access for existing customers, not pulled things to which we had access. You are going to lose many customers over this. I see a big class action lawsuit coming.

    • This new “Publishers Extra” program consists of more recent newspaper editions that are still under copyright and are being made available through cooperative agreements with the publisher/copyright holder. It is another way to get access more recent content and Basic subscribers will get you access to those “out-of-copyright” years from those publishers’ papers.

      • More recent papers? I just tried to access an article – 1942, recent only if you have managed to capture hieroglyphics – which I have accessed in the past with my membership and it is no longer available unless I upgrade my membership …. OUTRAGEOUS!!!!

  12. I’m really frustrated by this change. There are two newspapers where, for the last couple years, I could find quite a bit of my family information. But suddenly these two newspapers are now included in the Premium price (which is significantly higher than what I was originally paying and way past my budget). I was actually struggling with whether or not to maintain my account as it is, but now that you’ve taken away the two newspapers where I could historically find a lot of information, I think you may have just lost my business. I’ll probably try for a few more months but if more of the newspapers move from the free to the premium, I will definitely be cancelling.

    • The new Publishers Extra is actually content that was not on the site before. The content you had available before this new program launched is still in place and we will continue to add papers to that subscription level. You do not need to subscribe to the new program to access the papers you had access to before. This new “Publishers Extra” program consists of more recent newspaper editions that are still under copyright and are being made available through cooperative agreements with the publisher/copyright holder.

      • This is not true. I have downloaded many articles from the 1930’s to the 1970’s for the Monroe, LA Newstar-World. Now, all are in Publishers Extra. The Monroe Morning World continues to be available. Please explain.

        • I have the same problem. many articles from the Appleton Post Crescent from the 1930’s era that were once available to me are no longer accessible. The statement above that this only applies to “content that was not on the site before” is not true.

          • I wonder how many more papers are like this. Looks like you ( was caught in a lie.

      • That is not true – I have downloaded the Springfield Leader – 1927-30 many times and now the have been moved to Publishers Extra. I do not wish to have their new content. I would love to have up to 1941. But I will settle with up to 1930 – which I had before you took it away. We are under contract for a year – you can not just take papers away that we already had access to! – we deserve a discount and answers. I can not believe that you were going to just sneak this by up. And FYI – the paper is not on your “Publishers Access” list

          • OK, but these notes about Des Moines and Pittsburgh newspapers contradicts the statement that no post-1922 content that was once part of a basic subscription has disappeared behind the 2nd-level paywall.

  13. This one continues to bother me as well. The price increase is definitely not worth the money for me given the limited geographical scope of the offering. However that was an easy decision to make. What bothers me is the basic subscription is still $80 bucks and from my midwestern perspective the number of papers and issues in them has apparently stopped growing. Future growth seems doubtful since they are setting up the new product and going after our business since we are existing customers for the original product. I turned off autorenew. More state history archives are putting things online, there are more options each year. And Ancestry is already getting too much money out of me. Their game on all sites appears to be to set new restriction levels and want membership upgrades.

    • Agreed. I’m glad you pointed this out that our current basic subscription access has stopped growing, and we no longer receive the notifications we used to. Very sad.

      • Julian, The Basic subscription will continue to grow. As we add more publisher titles the Basic subscription will have a portion of the content added as well.

    • All of the newspapers that are here – are available in my local library. I guess I will just need to go back there and pull them up there. They have new digital scanners to get the info. It sad I used to enjoy the site

  14. You guys keep saying that Publishers Extra is new content that was never available. That is an outright lie. Ive had access to several of the newspapers you list as publishers extra for a LONG time now and suddenly you expect me to kick in more and not just that but yoh made this change in the middle of my agreement with you. If that isnt bait and switch I dont know what is. It would be one thing if the change took effect at renewal (and i would still cancel) but to change my content in the middle of my agreement is simply dishonest.

    • Which papers are you referring to? Publisher Extra subscription only applies to the more recent years or in-copyright year’s of paper. A general rule is that any paper through 1922 will be available on the Basic Subscription, there are some exceptions where more years will be available on the Basic, like the Pantograph, it goes through 1963.

      • See my post above. The Monroe, LA News-Star now requires Publisher Extra. All dates used to be available in the Basic subscription. I have downloaded many examples.

      • The pittsburgh post is just one example and i can prove to anyone who wants to sue beyond any question that ive access to this paper beyond 1923 with a basic membership since it was first added and now i dont.

      • You are correct. The Publisher Extra subscription only applies to “the more recent years or in-copyright years of the particular paper(s)” involved. That doesn’t mean that the complaints that we did previously have access to some, if not all (but I personally can’t prove that), under the regular subscription aren’t well founded.

        I know I have accessed some of these myself much later than 1923, like The Anniston Star and Ashville Citizen-Times for example, on this site previously.

        I understand clearly what has happened, you got busted for selling access to copyrighted papers by the copyright holders, and now you have to pay more for the rights to these “in-copyright” papers. With possibly some extra content thrown in to boot. That isn’t what bothers me.

        Apparently your company policy is not acknowledging that the subscription holders did have access to these papers previously; however, basically calling the subscribers lairs though “1984” style double speak is just bad form.

        Copyright is the reason that the Chronicling America project only posts pre-1923 papers. your only saving grace was the access to the post 1923 dates, and now it appears you no longer have that without us having to pay prices. At least on certain papers anyway.

        I could get mad, cancel my subscription, and storm off; however, I guess I’ll ride out the rest of my basic subscription, and access what I can before they to become part of your new subscription level.

        • Ok I stand corrected. I didn’t check to see if access to these two papers were gone after 1922. I just assumed they were since they were on your list, but they are still accessible as of right now. I do wonder for how long though.

        • Yes! You are straight lying! I have saved many clippings from the Pittsburgh papers and others from the 40-until present concerning family members and now can’t find a thing. I pay a ‘hefty’ premium added to ancestry membership for this and you are definitely ‘renigging’ and cheating your existing customers.

          • PS- we ought to launch a FB campaign to make everyone aware to BEWARE of this scam. I am down for letting my 2000+ contacts and genealogy groups know TODAY!

          • Can you send us an example or name of one of the papers that you have clipped that you believe is missing. We have had some bugs that we are currently working on with some missing papers.

      • This is a load of crap, limiting papers to pre-1922. I have most of those available for free at Chronicling America

        I subscribed to to have access to those post 1922 papers, and now you are taking those away. Why on earth would I keep the basic subscription?

          • I don’t have a specific paper, but I know I have accessed many papers after 1922 since I started my subscription. If those will no longer be available, why would I continue my subscription to, when these pre-1922 papers are free on Chronicling America. I will make sure that my subscription is not set to auto-renew.

  15. I agree….bait and switch and very deceptive. What was part of the regular subscription a month ago is suddenly part of a substantially more expensive subscription. I think it is very dishonest to makes such changes mid subscription.

    • Nothing was taken away from the “regular,” Basic, subscription. That is still the same and in fact, more was added and continue to be added. If you do see a paper that you know is missing, please let us know as we are still working out some bugs on the site with this update.

  16. While I use this service primarily for pre-1923 content, I’m alarmed to see your ‘Premium Subscription’ appears to have pulled previously available post 1922 content.
    This also makes me wonder if now, or in the future, pre ’23 content will be moved into the premium category.
    Or, if future releases of older papers will be placed in premium.
    Your marketing department either has too little truth to work with or there is nothing but greed to report in this move.
    I do volunteer work for a number of library projects who have considered the embargoed digitization route. With this new business model in place I will strongly suggest other options vs. feeding this monster.

  17. I just turned off my Auto Renew. Read all of the previous blogs. Do not like what you are attempting to pull off. I agree with majority of the posters; sounds like the old bait and switch to me as well. You are going the way of & Fold3. Why are all of you trying to fix what isn’t broke? PROFIT, that’s why.

  18. I, too, was surprised by the Premium fee message. It seems way out of line for the cost. I opted to purchase the Basic package a couple of months ago. I just turned off my auto-renew. It just is not worth it. It is way over my budget.

  19. I have tried calling today 20 times – only for the message to go straight to voice mail. I called – and was able to get right through. I spoke with a very nice gentleman that was trying to get a more direct number. He had to get into a chat box with someone because even he did not have access to reaching someone at I have sent 2 emails and I received 2 canned emails back not addressing the problem.

    I can not believe this is the way you want to treat to people that provide the money for your salaries.

    We should be able to have the content that was there previously in my case 1927-30 before. Now I have lost back to 1922 in one paper.

    If your going to make such a major change – we need to have a long email directly from explaining the changes and why.

    Not a switch and let us find out on our own.

    What gives???

    I wish for someone to call – I wish to speak with a live person.

    Is that too much to ask?

    • Rick, We are working through issues with some titles on the site now that previously were available on including the Springfield Leader. We hope to have an update soon. Our apologies for the poor experience with our support staff. We will address that with the team as well.

  20. So glad to hear people outing and Ancestry on this blatant ripoff attempt. These companies in general have good customers happy with their products. Why rip us off? It has made be check into who owns Ancestry and its products.

  21. Another example of rolling out new content too soon, without working out the bugs and performing a thorough Quality Control review????
    Suggest you roll out a beta version – so users will expect bugs – free for a time or at least at a much lower price. Seems as though you want your users to perform the QC and pay you for the privilege!

    I wouldn’t mind the extra cost so much if other improvements were also made – refined search ability, ability to ‘tag’ and/or put clippings into folders, ability to link clippings to ‘facts’ in Ancestry, etc. etc.
    Both Ancestry and Newspapers appear, from the user perspective, to value additional records over quality and the efficiency of use.

    I try to embrace change, but Ancestry’s practice of rolling out poorly working changes is VERY frustrating. (Am still waiting for a family group sheet on the new Ancestry.)

    If a portion of the (apparently) MILLIONS of dollars being spent on advertising were used on product improvement, the products would sell themselves!!!

    P.S. What about Semi-Annual subscriptions???? The monthly ‘Extra’ fee is outlandish….

  22. What started as a helpful Mormon organization has outgrown its ethical values. I have been with Ancestry for over 15 years and it has become more and more apparent that greed has become the motivating factor. Greed over good service and honest dealings.

    To say I am disappointed is a gross understatement. Not listening to one’s subscribers is a fool’s errand and will eventually cost customers as they will out-price many of their long-standing customers.

    Another one bites the moral dust!

  23. I Ilive in Northern Kentucky but there are no publications like the Kentucky Post, Kentucky Enquirer , Kentucky Times Star , also the Lexington papers 1880 s to 1960 s. I’m also looking for later years of the Bourbon County News 1920 s to 1940 s . For Indiana I am looking for the new Albany area and also Harrison County Indiana, Crawford County Indiana years 1850 to 1930 .In Illinois I am looking for any publications in Wayne City Illinois and Fairfield ,Illinois. In Oklahoma Iam looking for later years for the Tulsa area like 1950 ‘s and 1960 ‘s

    Thanks team and keep up the good work.


  24. Could there be a monthly subscription for the publisher extra the 130.00 dollars a year is a little pricey for all the publications. A listing of the publisher extra publications would be nice and to have the option to pick the publication of interest .The 795 a month like the Cincinnati Enquirer was nice while it lasted.

  25. I agree with much of the general disappointment expressed here about the changes to access. It seems that a new business model has been worked out simply to make more money. While many people have expressed disappointment about the lack of certain local papers, I am more upset that more of the big city papers are not available: Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, etc.

  26. I can’t view the complete list of what the upgrade includes. When I go to the upgrade page, it says:

    “What newspapers have Publisher Extra editions?
    To learn more about the Publisher Extra subscription, read this blog post.”

    So I click on that and it takes me to this blog post which has a short list and then says “and many more… See complete list.” Which just links back to the upgrade page! Neither page has a complete list.

    Underneath “read this blog post” on the upgrade page it does say: “Publisher Extra Papers” and “Available Years” but there is nothing listed under them – I assume the list is supposed to be there, but it’s not. I have tried in both Chrome and Firefox. How am I supposed to assess whether it’s worth upgrading if I can’t see what I’m getting in the upgrade?

  27. Please add some Connecticut papers especially the older issues of the Danbury News Times.

  28. When I click on to see the full list of the papers it won’t show them and kicks me back to My subscription is through so will the full access come with that or do I have to pay even more money?

    • Jeri,

      The full list of papers should be on the site again later today. If you have the Ancestry All Access subscription it includes the Basic subscription but access to the Publisher Extra content will require an upgraded subscription.

      • The normal 6-month price is $260. That’s over $500 a year! How much money do you think people make? I am taking care of my mother and raising two teenage grandchildren. I don’t have a bottomless pit.

        • Please for the sake of sanity explain the company relationship between Ancestry and Newspapers! My Newspapers invoice is very modest and I am happy with it. As for Ancestry, I don’t use them, but I am aware that these genealogy sites are very expensive, while Newspapers account – even with the update – is still very reasonable. It seems all of the complaints should be removed to Ancestry and not here.

  29. Well, add me to the list of unhappy customers. I have had access to papers I now can no longer access. For instance, I have previously used The Tennessean (Nashville, Tennessee) – Friday December 22, 1967 (page 32) and Thursday, December 21, 1967 (page 50) as a source for two obits for my ancestor, Jackson Hearne Wells. I documented this source in my tree, but now can no longer see the pages. Shame on me for not dowloading those obits. Shame on you for making such a major change and charging almost 3x as much as I have been paying to see the same thing. After the Ancestry Family Tree Maker debacle in December, this is running a close second. I used to recommend this website. Now, who can afford it?

  30. This is absolute bull. First, there hasn’t been any newspapers added to the other site you own You create this website for people to pay additional money since they can’t receive any new newspapers as part of their subscription. Now in addition you want more money on top of that to view “premium content” which we can all get with a basic library card at any local library. Then, you take away the newspapers that we did have access to on and call it a so called “glitch” that’s being worked on by your company. You must think we all have our head buried in the sand. Truth is, you have your head buried in the sand. You’re websites will all be in the sand shortly, because people are catching on very quickly.

    • In fairness, did not “create” at all, let alone as a way to make people pay more money – existed independently and then bought it. At that time, they could have annexed it into’s database but they chose to keep it separate, probably because there might have been users paying for but not, who would then be forced to pay a much higher subscription for all of when all they wanted was access to Had they done that, those users would have been moaning about how did it solely to force them to pay more.

  31. I’m having the same problem as many others. I used to have access to many post-1930 Rochester NY Democrat & Chronicle pages. Now all of sudden they’re listed as “extras.” You will be losing my business if this situation doesn’t change. I will not pay $99 extra to “upgrade” my subscription.

    • Where did you get $99 extra from? It’s $29.95 extra per 6 months (so $60 extra for the year), or $11.95 extra per month, which would only be closest to $99 if you paid for 8 months, though that would still be $95.60, not $99. Regardless, it doesn’t make sense to pay monthly if you plan to subscribe for more than 5 months so the most you’d be paying is $60 extra a year. I’m not arguing with your objection to the principle of the matter, I just don’t know where you got $99 extra from?

      • Upgrade to Publisher Extra

        •Everything in Basic
        •38 million+ additional pages licensed from publishers
        •Archives through last month
        •Continually updated

        See Publisher Extra papers

        $139.90 $99.90 /year*

        • Wow, that is NOT what mine says. Mine says:

          Add Publisher Extra

          Everything in Basic
          38 million+ additional pages licensed from publishers
          Archives through last month
          Continually updated
          See Publisher Extra papers

          $29.95 /6 months
          $11.95 /month

          That’s USD – are you maybe in Canada some other dollar currency? I am also on through’s World Plus subscription so maybe that’s it? Are you subscribing to independently?

          • I’m also on Ancestry’s world plan. Yes, that is probably Cdn $, so we must presume that the original poster is also quoting Cdn $. If you live in Australia, it probably will quote Aussie $ and if in Great Britain, their currency.

            As an aside, now that Ancestry has also taken over Find-A-Grave, I find that site now frustratingly slow. It was all so much simpler 15 years ago! Lol.

  32. I’m done! You’re “Publishers Extra” irritates me big time. It’s a Bait & Switch and that’s all. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

  33. I’m pretty sure some post-1923 Pittsburgh, Pa., newspapers were once part of the basic plan.

    I guess i’m not seeing an ironclad promise that existing Basic content will grandfathered and never be taken away to be locked behind the new paywall. Otherwise, what’s to keep every publisher from demanding it?

    It’s also obvious that resources devoted to scanning new content will be diverted to premium-playing microfilm rather than enhancing the basic content.

    • I am just about positive that you are correct regarding the Pittsburgh newspapers. Because I did about a triple-take when I suddenly was asked for more money.

  34. cancel my free trial , it won’t let me look up another and keeps saying my email address is something else, when it isn’t .

  35. Goodness me, all of these complaints! Well, just to add something positive: I am VERY satisfied with my basic subscription and I will give the extra service due consideration. I think that could be added to the sliced bread list of good ideas and good service with value for money! I use it regularly as a part of my research projects. I don’t expect to find everything in one place, because if I did, there would be no need to research anything! is sort of like the ‘part of a balanced diet’ slogan – as that message might pertain to researching political and sociological past events.

    • Clearly the papers you research havent been taken away from you like many of ours have. That or you simply a paid shill. Either way some of us got screwed, hence the legitimate negative comments.

  36. I did have some problems accessing papers I had previously read – you have had programming problems in the past – I would suggest that this is what is happening – the date of cutoff for some publications is wrong in your progamming – get your IT people on it –

  37. Blake,

    The subscription to Publisher Extra is too high and not worth it. It saddens me that papers originally on the basic subscription are no longer available due to a “bug.” What papers “that were taken away” will never be restored to the basic subscription? I will not be upgrading nor will I be renewing. Your subscription is not worth the headache it gives me.

  38. Why can I no longer access the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle issues that I previously had access to?!

  39. It appears to me that your team is working diligently to increase our access to records, even after the bug. I’m excited for the chance to access more papers so easily even with the added cost. I’m interested in the recent papers so I look forward to upgrading my account. I also am glad to help fund your great work to acquire more papers. Keep up the wonderful work!

    • As a researcher who values and uses services, I wholeheartedly agree. What the complainers do not seem to understand is that like all ventures things go wrong. But I am old enough to remember when I used to buy boxes of books from the public libraries in the USA when librarians were led to believe that printed books and newspapers would soon be as dead as a dodo with the rise of the Internet. Consequently old newspapers and microfilms were dumped into the trash. Thankfully there were entrepreneurs who saw the mistake and created what has now become!

  40. What is going on?? Some people are quoting monthly and semi-annual rates. The only option on my account is annual.
    $139.90 /year

    Refund from existing subscription(s): $22.59

    139.90 – 22.59 = $117.31.

    I’m on Social Security and that didn’t go up this year at all.

    I had to switch to monthly. That’s a lot of money on my budget.

    • Jim,

      Ancestry All Access subscriptions include the Basic Subscription. As a result those subscribers have only pay the difference in price from Basic to Extra. So in the case of a Ancestry All Access subscriber they are the only ones able to sign up for a semi-annual Extra add on subscription for $29.95 Ancestry All Access Monthly subscribers can add Extra for $11.95. To see your subscription options sign in and go to If you have additional questions give us a call at 1-877-519-0129.

  41. I can’t believe that Detroit, Michigan is FINALLY included in the database! Not only the Free Press, Detroit News, but the Polish Paper as well! Detroit is a bear when it comes to trying to get online information. Thank you so much for including them in the list! I am simply amazed and thrilled! Wayne County (Detroit) is so important, and was & is so big, for polish immigrant families and now living in Tennessee, I am beyond thrilled I do not have to search microfilm now! Living far away, IMO it is worth the extra $59 (I have the world Ancestry extra account)… and I like that you also have an option just for Free Press — though same price.
    Thank you for working with Gannett and being able to publish the Detroit papers!

  42. I was so excited to discover this service and was planning to subscribe but put it off for the past weeks while compiling the info I wanted to research. Now I come back and find that the $89 subscription is now $139. Very very disappointed and I will not be buying.

    very VERY let down. : (

  43. I do think the price is high.
    Personally I am waiting a bit to see where this goes. I have already found that the Great Falls paper and the Decatur IL paper (Herald Review) will not search the advertised range. The Decatur paper produces content from 1980 and non before. The Great Falls paper also does not reveal search results beyond a limited range.

    I would also like to see the Evansville (IN) Press and I know it has been completely digitized as it is available in the Evansville library but not on a website except at through a portion of 1927.

    I am sure some of the newspaper websites are connected in some way (i.e., genealogy bank and Newsbank). How about some type of combination package with and some other site? Is that possible?

  44. How about some old newspapers from Mifflin and Centre counties in Pennsylvania? Especially from the 1800s and early 1900s.

    Old Harrison county, Ohio newspapers would be welcome also.

  45. I am still not seeing any response to the Pittsburgh Post. This was absolutely part of the basic plan past 1923 until this cash grab was rolled out. Can I get some clarification of the newspapers team that they have ripped me off or was this simply a “mistake” and they intend to put the Post past 1923 back into the basic plan. If thats the case then they need to refund me my monthly payment or apply it to the next month because a service I paid for was cut in the middle of what constitutes a binding agreement. And again, I can prove that I had access to that paper at least with a basic membership.

    • In March of 2015 we worked with the publisher to launch the Pittsburg Post-Gazette archive. ( On their site the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has 136 years available and we show you have had an annual subscription to their archive since June 2015 in addition to your Basic subscription. Perhaps this has cause some confusion. With your Pittsburg Post-Gazette archive subscription you should be able to view all years of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette archive either on their archive site or on

      Based on our arrangement with the publisher, Basic has had the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette available through 1922 since March 2015. In January 2016, with the launch of the Publisher Extra subscription we were able to make all of these types of publisher archives available in a single subscription with Publisher Extra. As such Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 1923 to 2014 will only be available on the publisher archive or with Publisher Extra and not part of the Basic subscription.

      Thank you for your feedback.

      • Again, this is not true. I have never had a subscription to just the pittsburgh post. Ive only had a basic subscription to your service through which i had access to the post well beyond 1923. Why you guys are lying is beyond me but youve lost my business and i wont recommend you to anyone else. Quite the contrary.

        • You know something else that got me thinking. You guys just flat out lied and said that i had access to the pittsburgh post past 1923 because somehow you could see that i had an annual subscription to the post through their archive. If this were true (and its not as we both know) it still doesnt explain why i suddenly lost the access i had before without me making any changes. Nice try at some cheap damage control but you guys just got caught in a lie and i hope someone sues the @#&% out of you such a practice. If they do they can count on any help or proof i can provide and we both know i can back up everything ive said above.

  46. Wonder why there isn’t a monthly subscriber option for Publisher Extra??? Sometimes coming up with $100 bucks plus is cost prohibitive for those on a budget.

  47. Judging from the number of complaints since this started on January 15, Ancestry should be concerned and should recognize these (valid) complaints as a major red flag. I haven’t checked my basic subscription for any deletions on what I paid for, but if I do find that some of them have been removed in order to charge more money by Ancestry in an entirely different program, I will consider it to be a breach of contract and will expect a full refund or see if anyone is interested in a class action suit.

    I, too, find this constant niggling for evermore money by Ancestry most unattractive and most unprofessional.

    What started out as a great idea and a business with huge appeal for many is rapidly deteriorating into just another money-grab (in my opinion). Not smart considering the economy is not robust and people are tightening their belts. Expensive hobbies are always amongst the first to be dropped when money is tight.

    Just some advice you might want to think over.

  48. I just want to say again to everyone looking to leave, Many of these pre-1922 newspapers are available for free at Chronicling America

    I personally do not intend to renew my basic subscription, since I can get those for free.

    The Publishers Extra is just a Money Grab. Definitely not worth the cost.

    I think in the long run, ancestry will lose far more money over this debacle than they will make on this price increase.

Comments are closed.