Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1.    #1  
    Hi,

    I think pay news sites will never work!

    Take care,

    Jay

    Rupertís Paywall is Meant to Keep People In, Not Out
    By Mathew Ingram Jul. 19, 2010, 1:30pm PDT

    Rupert’s Paywall is Meant to Keep People In, Not Out

    The paywall at the Times of Londonís web site has led to a drop of at least 65 percent in the newspaperís online readership, according to early estimates. Although the paywall is still very new and these numbers are not official, they seem fairly plausible compared to some other paywall experiments in the mainstream media. By most normal measures, losing two-thirds of your readership would seem like a huge blow, but managers at Rupert Murdochís News Corp. are said to be satisfied with that figure. Why? Because the Timesí paywall is likely just as much about keeping existing print readers in as it is about keeping freeloading web readers out.

    The whole structure of a paywall like the one recently instituted by the Times appears to be aimed at keeping casual web visitors away from the newspaperís content. In most cases there is either a block that appears when you try to read any story or a graduated block ó like the one that used to be in place at the Financial Times and is expected soon at the New York Times web site ó that kicks in after you have read a certain number of stories in a particular month (these paywalls rely on the use of cookies to track how often you visit). Readers have to pay a monthly fee in order to access more content.

    In reality, however, blocking casual readers ó who are seen as less valuable to advertisers because they donít spend as long on the site and arenít regular visitors ó is just one by-product of having a paywall. And even generating income from those readers by convincing them to sign up for a monthly subscription is only a by-product. For many newspapers, the main driving force for instituting a paywall is to keep print readers from migrating away from buying the physical product (which still generates the majority of advertising revenue at most newspapers) to reading for free online, where their eyeballs are worth less than they would be in print. Think of it as eyeball arbitrage.

    Take Newsday as an example: The daily newspaper covering Long Island, N.Y. instituted a paywall in October of last year. After three months, it had driven away a huge number of online readers and accumulated a whopping 35 subscriptions for its efforts. But as Techdirt noted in a post about the site, erecting the paywall was as much about preventing churn among Newsday subscribers as it was about actually generating revenue from subscriptions (Newsdayís parent company is a cable provider; subscribers to the cable service get free access to the newspaper site). Newsday said as much itself.

    The problem with this strategy is that it is fundamentally a retrenchment approach ó in other words, a fall-back rather than a move-forward strategy. While it may be true that keeping out casual web users and forcing regular readers to pay may improve online advertising revenue somewhat (since advertisers will perceive paying readers as more valuable than non-paying users), and putting up a wall may prevent some continuing slippage in print readers (although not as much as the paper probably hopes it will), it does little to grow the online side of the equation. Contrast that with the approach taken by The Guardian, which is making its content freely distributable through an open API.

    If anything, in fact, the paywall approach prevents further growth for an online entity because it puts a wall between the content and those who might help to spread it ó in effect, marketing it to others ó by linking to it, posting it on Twitter and other social networks, etc. It is fundamentally a resignation from the open web.
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group
  2. #2  
    I agree that as long as news is online for free, no need to pay. But if anyone goes the subscription route, it needs to be at a very low cost since digital distribution is much less.

    Murdoch has been shown to be too greedy, his digital prices are too high. And also he double dips.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  3.    #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Phone Diva View Post
    I agree that as long as news is online for free, no need to pay. But if anyone goes the subscription route, it needs to be at a very low cost since digital distribution is much less.

    Murdoch has been shown to be too greedy, his digital prices are too high. And also he double dips.
    Dear Phone Diva,

    Greedy is so very polite a word for what Murdock is! LOL!

    Take care, Jay
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group

Posting Permissions