WSJ.com: Information Wants to Be Expensive
Tuesday, 24 February 2009, 21:21 via Delicious/martinstabe
Gordon Crovitz has the best argument for paid content so far: "People are happy to pay for news and information however it's delivered, but only if it has real, differentiated value. Traders must have their Bloomberg or Thomson Reuters terminal. Lawyers wouldn't go to court without accessing the Lexis or West online service. ... For years, publishers and editors have asked the wrong question: Will people pay to access my newspaper content on the Web? The right question is: What kind of journalism can my staff produce that is different and valuable enough that people will pay for it online?" Read More...
Entry Filed under: del.icio.us Links,free,links,paywall
Additional comments powered by BackType
1 Comment Add some more of your own
1. sloane | 2 March 2009 at 2024
This was a great piece. I do like the NYTimes, but I found it interesting that they ended their piece on the closing of the Rocky Mountain News with a quote that from one of the paper's editors that I think is telling of the reasons behind this and many other newspapers' demise:
“They want the amount of print you would find on a cereal box, which is what you get online,” said Mike Pearson, 49, a features writer and editor for The Rocky for 21 years.
“They want headlines only and graphs that summarize everything without going into a lot of analysis. And they feel entitled to even the most complex and sophisticated news coverage for free.”
This encapsulates the industry's disdain for its readers and what they want: both a disapproval of the demand for briefer news and a misunderstanding of what their readers and would-be readers do want. (Yes, a lot of people do want in-depth coverage–but they want it on certain topics….customized..and often they're getting it somewhere else. Magazine articles have long been a place where more in-depth analysis of news topics are undertaken–which is more appropriate than in a daily publication. The WSJ is another option of a newspaper that is still in the black precisely because they have offered a valuable product that isn't just interchangeable with that offered by any other news organization.)
A piece on a marketing and branding blog commented on the closing of The Rocky Mountain News and the decline of the newspaper industry in general, saying that newspapers never really got marketing after the age of penny papers, and that as they were transformed into institutions, they just began to think of themselves as indispensable. (Full post.) The author, John Tantillo, has published other pieces (ex. profiling TriCityNews) and has also suggested that it is the local papers (more in touch with their target market) that stand a better chance at enduring while the big-city newspapers fail.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed