English King Canute once took his throne to the seashore and commanded the tide not to come in. Of course, his feet got wet. Don’t judge him; newspapers are still erecting paywalls and expecting people to pay their newspaper for what they can get for free. To be fair, there are some specialized situations — niche publications and some community papers that hold a near-monopoly on news — that have experienced some success with paywalls. But if you’re still wrestling with this issue, take time to read blogger Alan Mutter’s latest posting. His thesis is that a growing number of free local news sites are driving another nail in the coffin of paywalls. An example from his blog: “While newspaper executives have agonized for the better part of two years about whether and how to charge for their costly-to-produce content, every indication is that the portals, local broadcasters and other media companies have no intention of asking anyone to pay for access to the increasingly ambitious local sites they are building. With a fast-proliferating number of respectable local sites giving away news to build traffic for their ad-supported ventures, newspapers simply won’t be able to charge for access – especially when their own stories are likely to become freely available within minutes at any number of competing sites.” And as frequently happens with well-thought-out blogs like Mutter’s, some of the comments from readers are as interesting as the blog itself. Here’s an example from one reader: “The only way newspapers can make the transition to online is to radically cut costs. We’re talking 80 to 90 percent cuts in personnel. An online news business needs to be built from the ground up, not have a legacy news module imposed on it. This is why I continue to believe the newspapers original sin wasn’t a failure to charge for content, but a failure to create completely separate online companies.” So add this posting to your consideration as you consider your paywall options.
Categories