Britishnewspaperarchive レビュー 

Since the "upgrade" this service has become a source of misery to use. Whowever thought it was a good idea to lose the simple filters that used to live on the LHS and replace them with having to scroll way down the screen to find a drop down and then have to search for your filers (which then get hidden once selected) needs to be relieved of his or her duty immediately. The name search functionality is pants. They advertised this change to the name function as being a new whizzy way of recognising names even if they appeared backwards as in, say "Smith, James" but in the process they seem to have lost the ability to find the names forwards! Just getting the most basic information out of this new system reduces you to wanting to run up the road screaming. And if you work by seeking a publication first and then wanting to go to a specific page of it second, good luck. That used to be a doddle but you can whistle Dixie now. I think some P45s should be issued up at the BNA for this state of affairs.

Ryan was superb. Being of an older generation, the new British Newspaper site was difficult for me to navigate. Ryan was hugely patient, writing me nearly a dozen emails to explain my faults. Eventually, I seemed to have got the hang of things. I was ready to give up...but Ryan came to the rescue. Great patience!

Hi , a small report in the British Newspaper Archive did not appear in the Irish Newspaper Archive although indexed in both cases. It was a mystery but on contacting you on your contact in the BNA,Sophie was able to give me the details as needed and a copy of the correct report.So I'm thinking of joining BNA soon.Cheers ,Jerome.

“Unlimited” should mean unlimited—not access until an undisclosed counter stops you

I paid £16.99 for a subscription described as “Unlimited,” expecting an evening of productive historical research. Within less than two hours, my access was restricted by a “fair usage” limit. No warning that numerical usage caps existed was presented to me before subscribing.

I have since seen BNA respond to another customer’s complaint by saying it has “always had usage limits.” That does not answer the complaint. If these limits are an established feature of your product, you have every opportunity to explain them clearly before taking payment. Their longevity does not make an “Unlimited” description accurate or tell a prospective subscriber what they are actually buying.

Why call the subscription “Unlimited” at all? If you sell a fixed allowance of page views per day and per month, describe it that way. Give customers the numbers prominently, define what you count, and let them decide whether the price represents good value. “Unlimited” communicates something fundamentally different from “access stops when you reach a numerical ceiling.”

The terminology becomes even more confusing once you encounter the restriction. The message referred to “500 papers daily.” I estimate that I consulted fewer than 50 separate newspaper and trade-paper issues. Does “papers” actually mean pages? Or page views, potentially counting repeated visits to the same material?

A newspaper issue and an individual page are not interchangeable. A substantial cinema trade-paper issue can contain dozens of pages. Moving through those pages to locate advertisements, screening notices, and distribution reports is ordinary research. Customers should not have to reverse-engineer a usage counter after their supposedly unlimited access has been stopped.

BNA’s own announcement dated 24 August 2026 states that its allowance increased from 500 to 1,000 pages daily. Its published terms also specify 1,000 “Newspapers” per 24 hours. Why did the restriction I encountered refer to 500? Why do different parts of the service refer to “papers,” “Newspapers,” “pages,” and “page views” without a consistent explanation?

My experience with competing research services makes this especially frustrating. I use Newspapers.com, NewspaperArchive.com, Ancestry, and Fold3 without encountering comparable interruptions to my research. I pay less for Newspapers.com than I paid for this subscription. BNA should explain why its service requires these restrictions when competing subscriptions allow me to carry on working—and why it nevertheless markets the plan as “Unlimited.”

Simply saying “we have always had usage limits” explains neither the need for those limits nor the decision to advertise capped access using that word.

The collection itself is valuable. That makes this experience more frustrating: I wanted to use it, was willing to pay, and expected to spend my evening researching. Instead, I spent that time investigating restrictions, comparing contradictory descriptions, and requesting my money back.

I have demanded a full refund and cancellation of automatic renewal. If your subscription has numerical access limits, advertise those limits plainly. Do not call it “Unlimited” and leave customers to discover the qualification when their work is interrupted.

What on earth were BNA thinking ? this site is impossible to use. i used to love researching my family history .... i can no longer find anything ... very frustrating. The old system was easy to use this new one is a nightmare . I shall not be renewing my subscription ! gutted !!!

A great resource, backed by an excellent team. I had a problem with my subscription renewal, all my own fault(!), which was quickly resolved by Marion. Great service, wholeheartedly recommended.

Find the archive a delight and so user friendly while any queries are answered promptly as was the case with Jamie recently on a billing misunderstanding. Shortens my winter dies the BNA

The website changes are constant and unwelcome. I subscribed but found myself unable to enjoy using the website (member since 2013) to the point where I stopped. There are so many unnecessary changes to the website UI that you dont know what to expect. What a waste of money it was in the end. Keep in mind that if you spend money, you may waste it. Hopefully, they'll settle on a design or bring back the old search experience.

BNA will tell you they listen, they don't. They may say they care about user experience, they don't.

Avoid this once great website.

Oh my goodness. The new layout is just unusable. I have subscribed for many years but am cancelling as I cannot waste the time for what used to be a simple process. All I want to do is choose a newspaper, pick a date range and enter a keyword. It’s turned into a complicated click around to try and find anything. I haven’t yet been able to do a simple search successfully. I will be looking for another site to use. You have made a complete shambles of this update. Not user friendly and over complicated. Frustration overload.

I have tried to use it since the new version was brought in and there simply is no comparison. The current manifestation is awful. It is so time consuming, with so many drop-down boxes that it takes 3-4 times the amount of time to find stuff. What was intuitive is now a labour -intensive grind. It might be all singing, all dancing, shiny and new to those no doubt congratulating themselves on their brilliant innovations, but to the ordinary paying mortals who have to use it, it is hellish and all the pleasure has been sucked out of it. For heavens sake, enough with the anodyne corporate gloop that you serve out for excuses. I don't want your 'help.' I know how to use a computer. I would just like back the decent usable interface that we used to have. This one sucks.

I have been using the British Newspaper Archive since 2017. I had a query about my renewal subscription as I was not on auto renewal.
However, I send an email and Nicolle answered it almost immediately and the problem was resolved within 24 hours. A great service.

I contacted the British Newspaper Archive with questions about copyright and permission to reproduce historical newspaper images for an educational article.

Joanna was absolutely wonderful! She not only explained the licensing conditions clearly but also took the time to identify specific copyright holders, provide relevant contacts, and explain how to find copyright information in the archive.

She even offered to help with further research if needed.

It's rare to receive such thoughtful, patient and genuinely helpful customer service. Thank you, Joanna, for making my historical research so much easier!

Sophie was very helpful with my subscription

I rely on this site for my work and have been using it for almost ten years. The recent overhaul makes it much more long-winded to find what I'm looking for. The search facility was never great and now it's even worse. The site is frequently slow and sometimes not working at all (such as now as I write this). It's poor value for my annual subscription. It's also a huge shame that this valuable resource is so tricky to access and work with.

This is sad. When I'm at home, I now have to pay to see all of the saved articles at I looked at in the public library. That's a pretty poor show. I definitely won't subscribe now.

I really should have cancelled my subscription but sadly off today so stuck with another 3 months of nonsense and banality. How I can key in "KIrkcaldy Railway Station" and get over 6 million hits going back to 1754 is beyond belief. The commas have no effect - I have Kirkcaldy or Railway or Station and I had no idea Kirkcaldy had moved to London. The new system is absolute rubbish and no attempts at all to remedy the shortcomings.

I appear to be having to add more information which I am now doing on the 6th October. As mentioned I keyed in Kirkcaldy Railway Station which I did tonight AGAIN! 109,088 this time and oldest was 1824 - great since the station opened in 1847. 26th August 1824 highlights Kirkcaldy.26th July 1826 highlights railway and 7th November 1829 of all things highlights stationer. Do you really think you have improved the system - just look at the Trust Pilot score - that should tell you everything about this upgrade. Hours of sifting before you can find what was once a simple task.

Excellent help today from Joanna, who looked up my details, sorted out my query and went the extra mile.
Thanks for her great service!

Before installing your new search system, it was an absolute joy search out Newspaper articles. Now it is an absolute nightmare. Nothing tallies or relates to the documentation that is being sought in the system. I have tried, in vain, to locate and download an article that I downloaded years ago at the British Newspaper Library. Previously, we were able to have quick general and overall review of all the newspapers. Now we are forced to search out articles in a narrow channel of newspaper documentation that is clearly unreliable, inaccurate and constricting. Please, please reinstate the previous serach engines. They were totally reliable and user-friendly. Please! Thanks, tahir

I have used this site for years, it was an extremely useful research tool. I am appalled at the changes. It's impossible to find anything anymore. It is also outrageous that access to articles that users previously paid for has now been revoked. Even when searching for events and articles that I know exist, finding them is now completely hit and miss. I will not be renewing my subscription, I will only access from the library from now on.

They have changed what was a fantastic resource into one that’s pretty unmanageable now. I had saved research pages arranged under specific groupings for ease of use but now all my pages are listed separately without their group headings, making them near impossible to remember what research corresponded to each particular subject. Just awful site now.