New York Times Charges. Is it Smart?

Posted by Jesse Poe on January 20 at 12:30 PM So the New York Times is going to start charging for their on-line content.

Makes sense, people have always paid for the New York Times at the newstand or to open their door in the morning and find it waiting there, so why not on-line.

I clicked a survey yesterday on this very topic and the results showed that some 70% thought it should be free. Because journalist should work for free? Absolutely not, but because we have come to believe that everything on the internet should be free. How we got to that idea collectively is the subject of other posts, but it is true, free is the current currency of on-line life.

So is the Times doing something smart?

Well smarter than the Wall Street Journal, in that incidental visitors, arriving no more than once in a while through searches and links, would be unaffected by the new system. This is good as that Wired.com has proven it is the long-tail that is of greatest importance of all. Over 70% of the searches performed leading to their site are for articles more than 2 years old.

Blocking information is like cutting off people’s water, it just seems wrong, but if we can’t afford to pay for serious journalism, we would suffer much greater problems in the future. As an example look at the age of miss-information that Fox “News” has created.

What is very smart in all of this is that the New York Times is thinking ahead. The deluge of e-Readers that are about swamp the market will most likely funnel down into a paid prescription sort of package, as that internet providers will not be able to squeeze a third monthly charge for access. Your home connection, your phone and your tablet. It just won’t fly. But wrap that up together in a package with different content packages and I’ll buy it.

The most important thing is that as technology steps into this new decade you will see an advance in e-readers that will make the hype for the Apple tablet seem without basis. Flexible screens, that you can fold and shove into your bag will be the tipping point for a complete exodus to digital news, as it will no longer make sense, neither environmentally nor economically, to produce a majority of printed news. Having begun to step into the waters of paid subscription again, the New York Times will, even if running a skeleton crew, still be alive for this new time of jubilee that will once again reposit newspapers as pillars of wealth as well as culture.

Whatever the Apple Tablet may turn out to be, based on the speculation of what it is purported to be, they are missing the boat. I don’t need an expensive one-sided laptop. But an affordable flexible reader that has my choice of content, that I can follow hyperlinks for further exploration or word/fact look ups, email articles to my friends, see videos attached to the news, fold up and shove in my bag; that will be a game changer, and worthy of subscription fees. I’m glad to see NY Times getting ready for that kind of game.

I’m also glad that subscribers to the physical paper will get free access to the site, that is fair and makes sense, I love reading the Times in my hands, but for passing articles and information on to friends and clients, the on-line site is essential. And will hold me over till the future arrives.
Topics: Internet, Mobile_Marketing, social_networking, strategy, tools        SHARE: