I completely agree with you. I used to work for an online sports news website and as soon as our feed system would break down we would rely on the Reuters or AFP websites – never AP’s. They are losing a lot without having a real website. Even their member area is as clunky as you may imagine it to be. AFP did a much better job in that respect – especially with its awesome Image Forum.

Hi, You have hit the nail on the head.
The thing that I can’t understand though is why all the continuing fuss about AP? The AP behaviour is typical of many/most corporations, where the organisation is on separate levels which fail to do any communicating other than often nonsensical emails sent downhill to the ‘team’ (Hi, Team !) with no purpose whatsoever of any communication intended other than to the email address in the ‘cc’ line, where the object is to impress the cc’ed recipient (who is generally the direct boss of the email sender) that work is being done by the underling sender.
So, regarding AP, who cares?
They are fouling up miserably, and appear happy at every level to be doing so. I have advised my small readership to simply avoid quoting AP.
An organisation that no longer exists cannot obstruct the public good, and the news business has enough other players who have better skills, and who are user-friendly.