This afternoon when I was driving to lunch, a panel of journalists was talking on WGBH/NPR about the effects and changes “New Media” is having on the old print world. A couple of their assertions had me irked:
- The reader commenting systems on newspaper websites are revolutionary and allow reporters to connect with their audience in the best of times, and allow general flame-warring and caustic comments to see the light of day otherwise – they seemed legitimately surprised at examples of self-policing.
My Response: I agree that the comments better connect the writer with readers (people have commented on my blog, which is good), but I’m amazed that they actually think good, worthwhile readers actually put stock in or even read the comment section. I’ve been on many a news site, and I almost never look at the comments. I’m realising my behavior is different as a writer myself, but as a consumer I don’t give two hoots what poster #4 says most of the time. - Some of the panelists pondered that this “younger generation” who was growing up with the internet and commenting on everything might be in for a rude awakening when they have to go find a job and realize their boss “Googled” them and found all these comments on stories. Said boss might not agree with them and they would be out of a job.
My Response: Great! I don’t want to be working for anyone who holds my personal views or opinions against me (provided my personal opinions aren’t hateful in nature, which they aren’t). I try to attach my name to everything I post publically on the internet and would stand by that opinion if asked in the future. - The Journos wondered if and when anyone would be ready to pay for content. They rehashed the same arguments I’ve heard before about memberships and paywalls, the economics of delivering a 3 pound brick of paper to every subscriber’s house, etc.
My Response: OVER HERE! I will pay for content RIGHT NOW! If you’re a newspaper, here are the things you need to do to get my money:
1. I am a college student, and I don’t want to commit to a year or month of “membership”. I like the pay-for-use iTunes model.
2. Make the pricepoint good. I will get about 5-10 minutes of entertainment/information from a well written article. Then, unlike a 99 cent iTunes song, I’m probably never going to read it again. BUT, I would like the security of knowing I *could* read it again. Anywhere from 5 cents to 20 cents per article would be acceptable.
3. Make it easy for me to pay. Paypal or some other web-wallet system please. I don’t want to sign up for another account. And do me a favor and make it one-click like Amazon does.
I don’t remember everything and I am running short on time for this post. All I know is I get really frustrated when old fogies start talking about the habits of “this younger generation” and it seems everything that comes out of their mouth isn’t true, at least in my case. Have some actual representatives of “this younger generation” talk on your radio program and then maybe we’ll get some insight.
by Michael Novinson
05 Aug 2010 at 23:05
In terms of paying for content, the showdown will take place over the next 12 months. Most major news corporations (NYT, NewsCorp, etc.) are planning to charge for at least some of their content, realizing they can’t have a reasonably-sized news gathering team without people paying for content, readers will balk because they’ve become used to free online content for nearly a generation now, bloggers will have to decide whether to circumvent the paywall by re-posting entire articles or forcing their viewers to subscribe for the content, and we’ll see if people are willing to shift their online spending behavior. The primary question is: how long are news organizations willing to have reduced online readership (and therefore, reduced online advertising dollars) before “giving up” and reverting back to free contact for all?
by Andrew Thompson
06 Aug 2010 at 02:22
Readers are “used” to “free”, yes. I’m not sure that means they wouldn’t be willing to pay. I *almost* sprung for the new NY TimesReader 2.0 application, but alas I just can’t justify a $3.45 a week subscription to something I might only use some of the time right now – if they’d let me use it per article it’d be a solid sell for a college student like me. Since the major players are moving towards pay, I really hope they get it right, and try a “paywall” improved with new ideas like micropayments or even innovative licensing schemes that let me forward an article to 5 friends for free or something like that. Just putting up the old-style paywalls and greedily expecting way-more-than-you-can-budget-for-entertainment (because really, I look at news as entertainment at this stage in my life) subscription fees I just don’t see working.
I think you can have a middle ground between readership and paid content. I noticed it on the London Underground; people leave their copies of The Guardian and the London Evening Standard strewn all over the train car. Though one guy penultimately paid for it once, the same pages get used for entertainment at least 5-10 more times after that. The papers should be fine with that kind of a model. The guy who read the spare paper for free on Tuesday might pay for his copy on Wednesday and leave it behind. So you get really high readership, and only some of that readership is actually subscribing on a regular basis. Others buy in every once in a while.
This could work online too, it should be all in the licensing. In my 25-50 cent payment for one article (remember when papers themselves used to cost less than that!), I should be allowed to email a special link to a small number of my friends/family, so they can read it too. This gets it in front of more eyeballs, which is good for the paper and good for advertisers. Similarly, I wonder if there couldn’t be a special “reseller’s” account for Bloggers. Pick a package for how many readers you have, and have an encrypted copy of the article that you can post to your blog. The bloggers themselves could charge a price if they wanted (they are after all, reselling). Having a limited supply of free or reduced price postings could even drive traffic (and revenue) to the blogs, because readers would want to be the first to see a new posting.
Charge a nickel for article comments, get an article for free if you buy a product, there are tons of possibilities beyond boring, standard “paywalls”. It’s all about creativity, I’m just worried the stodgy old journalists don’t have enough of that left….