[Gannett Tower is seen in screenshot of PBS show on Tribune Co.]
Yours truly perked up last night when I heard pundits on The News Hour say we've trained consumers to expect news and information to be free online -- including all those updates you've been busting your humps to publish on your sites.
Problem is: As advertisers abandon newspapers, many march right past your websites, too, on their way to other new forms of even cheaper digital media. Meanwhile, few newspapers have matched The Wall Street Journal's success in selling subscriptions for online access.
"It breaks my heart that journalists are losing their jobs,'' BusinessWeek columnist Jon Fine told the News Hour panel on yesterday's Tribune Co. bankruptcy filing. "It breaks my heart when newspapers shrink. But someone's got to pay for this stuff." (Segment video.)
So, who's that gonna be?I don't rattle my tip jar often; I prefer waiting until after a busy news cycle brings a surge of new readers -- like the one we're in now because of all these layoffs. Well, I heard from a couple tough-to-please readers soon after I posted a humorous reminder about my voluntary $5 quarterly subscriptions:
"This is a really dumb posting at a time when people are looking here for real information,'' replied one reader. A few hours later, a second reader said: "Give me something substantial. If you do, you won't need to advertise to get my greenbacks."
Oh, well. There's always tomorrow!
Please support this blog with a voluntary $5 subscription; see the "Donate" tool in the green sidebar, upper right. Or, send cash/checks payable to: Jim Hopkins, 584 Castro St. #823, San Francisco, Calif., 94114-2594.
Don't let the cranks discourage you, Jim. Some people will never be happy.
ReplyDeleteLike me. Please make sure your ads look like ads and your news looks like news - even though most is rumor! But do the best you can!!
ReplyDeleteWatch the segment. There are many things they cite as being failures - the very same things Gannett is doing.
ReplyDelete"You can't cut your way out of this"
"There's nothing to brighten the revenue picture"
"This is not a cyclical change, it is a fundamental shift"
I gladly pay $65 a year to read my local paper on line. It's complete and they also offer a PDF version to browse. As a bonus, you also get free unlimited access to on-line archives back to 1998. I consider that to be a steal. I think a lot of readers would pay a nominal online access fee. No fuel, no route managers, no district managers, no carriers, no insurance, new tires, rebuilt engines, brake jobs, etc. Of course, that cleavers a lot of jobs too.
ReplyDeleteWSJ has been successful with online subscriptions for two reasons:
ReplyDelete1 - their archive access has significant research value and is only available with a subscription.
2 - online subscription is a package deal with print in their university sales program. In this program, DJ sales reps sell college professors on requiring the WSJ in their syllabus in exchange for WSJ trinkets, a free subscription and free course planning.
Local papers do not have either of these selling points and are unlikely to to successful at selling online access as a result.