Blog
Mar. 3rd Newspapers charging for online information: the tide begins to turn
![]()
Perhaps newspapers need to follow the marketing strategy of cosmetic firms: First, free samples to hook us; then one must buy the product.
Rumors abound that some large U.S. dailies ma start charging for their online content, and just this week, Newsday, the Long Island, New York, daily confirmed that it will start charging for online use.
We reported about that in this blog: http://www.garciamedia.com/blog/articles/information_in_newspapers_has_a_value_start_charging_for_it_online
Now, Financial Times deputy editor Martin Dickson has told the Press Gazette, of the UK, that in his view, newspapers may have to charge readers for online content as their business model
“is not looking healthy”—-which could be the understatement of the month. His newspaper, the FT, is one of the few papers to charge for some online content and its online subscriptions have risen nine per cent year on year to 109,609.
Recent figures from the FT show that digital revenues represented 67 per cent of FT Group revenue last year, up from 28 per cent in 2000.
At a different level, the regional daily, The Irish News of Northern Ireland, which is one of the few to charge for online content, was the only regional newspaper to paid-for circulation in the second half of 2008.
This is, indeed, very positive news amidst a barrage of worsening news for newspapers. My hope is that stories such as these will make publishers and editors realize that the answer to many of their current economic woes may be as close as having a serious discussion about charging for online content.
Martin Dickson, the FT’s deputy editor since 2005, said other papers might have to copy their model – though not yet.
We disagree. We believe that the sooner newspapers begin the process, the better. Time, I am afraid, is not on the side of newspaper companies. Quick action is the answer.
A blogger offers tips to newspapers
Perhaps one of the most thought-provoking arguments I have read for newspapers to charge for their content are found in Alan Mutter’s blog (http://tinyurl.com/b7ndnl).
Here is a highlight of Alan’s blog:
If the news media don’t start getting paid for at least a portion of what they produce, some outlets simply aren’t going to be around to provide it. It’s already too late to save the Rocky Mountain News and probably too late to save the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Tucson Citizen, which each face shutdown unless last-minute buyers emerge to rescue them.
So, free is not a business model that will support journalism produced by professional news organizations.
Review your inventory of offerings
I maintain that this is a discussion that MUST be taking place already, with a sound and realistic debate of the pros and cons about charging for content that has already been offered for free.
First, every newspaper should make an inventory of what it offers, selecting those items that readers may be willing to pay for. Each newspaper I know has a specialty, something that no other medium covers. In the case of regional newspapers, it is the local news and all that comes with it.
For national newspapers, it is the scope of analysis/opinion/investigative journalism that may offer the bait.
One thing is for sure, newspapers have assets to offer to readers and to charge for. But, before they can sell it effectively to their audience, they must believe that what they have is worth it—-starting with their brand. It stands for something. It means something to generation of readers. No reason why it should not continue to matter.
Of course, some of the newspaper’s website will always be for free, but lots of it will be charged for.
How cosmetic firms do it
Sort of like the marketing techniques of such commercial firms as La Prairie, the high-end Swiss cosmetic brand. It manages to get small samples of its line of products on the amenity kits given away to First and Business Class passengers by the world’s best airlines. You sample the moisturizer, you get hooked, you run to the store to get your (very expensive) skin caviar. You started with the free sample. You applied two drops to your forehead. You liked it. You bought it.
Perhaps this is a far fetched analogy, but one that has also worked for another brand, L’Occitane En Province—-its small shampoo and shower gels are now the standard for hotels worldwide. You liked the smell of that shower gel? Well, there is that L’Occitane store right at the airport before you take off.
We wish to continue this dialog, and to hear your comments about this timely—-and ever more urgently important—-topic.
Go here
http://tinyurl.com/arandf
Cutting through the visual clutter: Does your homepage pass the test?
Visual clutter happens most on high-content sites that lack organization in their design. It’s often overlooked or ignored and the result is a poor user experience, missed stories or information and a very short time on the web site. A visual segmentation test shows you exactly what’s wrong with the organization of your site and offers the opportunity to reorganize and create a design that keeps your users on your site longer and keeps them coming back. In this post, Mario describes the organization process and offers advice for avoiding clutter on your homepage. Here’s a sampling from the post:
A cursory look at most news sites and it becomes very obvious, regardless of how good the content, things are hard to find. Often, users don’t even know where to start. It’s as if everything has been dumped onto a page, crammed “above the scroll,” and left to the users to get their machetes out and make their way through the visual clutter. Users don’t want to have to work that hard. They’re too busy.
The tendency is to organize by subject matter or topic. And that works for building an information architecture or site map, but visually it’s better to organize by function. Nielsen’s advice works here—what are the main reasons users come to your site? For a news site the answers are normally to get news, to look for a job, to read columns, to share, to look at photos, to find out what’s going on for the weekend, etc. These are motivations more than categories and should be the basis for how the site should be organized visually.
For the rest of the article go here:
http://garciainteractive.com/blog/view/33/
:![]()
To read TheRodrigoFino blog, in Spanish, go:
http://garciamedia.com/latinamerica/blog/
TheMarioBlog posting #205
Posted by Dr. Mario R. Garcia on March 03, 2009
Comments
latest entries
- 40 Years/40 Lessons (2)—Refugee.
- Sunday report: Il Secolo update, plus more
- Il Secolo XIX: three days after relaunch
- Genoa’s Il Secolo XIX in new format, new look
- 40 Years/40 Lessons (1)—a look in the mirror
about the author
Dr. Mario R. Garcia
about the blog
A blog about storytelling, design, the projects we work on, the things we learn along the way. View all blog entries »
RSS Feed
Get updates delivered to your newsreader (RSS 2.0)
I like the idea of the inventory, because it doesn’t make everything on the website cost something. If there is content that’s still free, the website wouldn’t lose the viewers who are not willing to pay. Then again, not all the free content should be something not highly regarded in the inventory, with the occasional free “premium” content. And, of course, it remains to be known if those websites that are turning to pay content will allow micropayments, which should be always stressed as not only an opportunity, but as something almost mandatory. On the e-mail you sent me you mentioned parts of selected papers. That would be sort of a dream come true, but I wouldn’t expect it to be viable, since in a micropayment environment the websites would charge either for single articles or for the whole edition, which would make this a pricey option. But papers with a vision might give this “third” option. Thinking about the ideal micropayment environment, what would be the price of an article? Would all articles have the same prices? What about in-story boxes? Would they be charged separately? If I had a paper, I’d consider very carefully these options. I’d bundle in-story boxes with the main articles. And I’d have different prices for different kinds of articles, which is a big challenge, since there are papers in the US that cost 50 cents. If the printed paper costs US$ 1 or US$ 1.50, then it would be easier to add single articles for something like 10 or 20 cents, which would make attractive the option of buying the whole paper online for something like 75 cents or US 1. But this should be considered very carefully, not in the spur of the moment, as I’m doing when I type this.