Can Free Press Continue Online? Why Interactive News Can’t Be Free Forever
Newspapers have put themselves into a pickle. For the past decade they have made their content available online for free, while serving up the same content to their print subscribers, the next morning, for a fee.
What has this business model reaped?
Plummeting print circulation. Over 6% loss on average over the last year, and accelerating. Add to this plummeting share prices, and mutinous shareholders, and in some cases the break-up of national chains.
Haven’t the readers who once had home delivery moved over to the online edition?
Yes. However the online edition does not enjoy the wide range of revenue streams that print does.
Print has newsstand sales, paid subscriptions, the ability to sell the subscription list to outside marketers without the subs’ consent, full-page ads, small space ads, pre-printed inserts, Sunday magazines with ads, and the ability to expand and shrink in size as ad demand fluctuates. They can have an ads-to-edit ratio of 3:1 or more (try that online). Yes, print can be very profitable.
Online, newspapers have very few advertising options. There is no chance of adding a pre-printed advertising insert from Target or Sears. No local car dealers buying up pages in the classified section. Full-page ads? Yes, but the IAB says you MUST have a skip-the-ad button on these interstitial units.
Pop-ups? Well, Internet Explorer now blocks ALL pop-ups by default.
What’s left? In-page IAB units, like leaderboards, towers, and the like, and crawl-over or take-over pages.
But there’s an added wrinkle. In the print version, a newspaper can publish hundreds of ads per day, in all variety of sizes, and get paid for each one based on the number of copies printed, even if readers skip over many or most of the pages.
Online, the paper is at the mercy of the reader. What if there is an average of 5 page views per user session? It becomes impossible, therefore, to sell the same quantity of advertisers at the same impression levels as the print version. The difference in ad revenue between print and online is staggering. For the Tribune Company (Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, New York Newsday), Internet revenue is forecast to account for just 6% of their total income for 2006.
Reader Comments.
Online readers will pay, but only when offered a uniquely interactive level of engagement. Online — and the revenue streams that will certainly follow — is limited only by the imagination of publishers and marketers.
I think the revenue model is faulty to charge for content. That can only go so far and yes, readers will bolt somewhere else. Only archives can conceivably charge for content, I think.
I think there should be revenue models of charge per content/article. I know I personally read an article – not a newspaper online. There are too many things out there, and 1 AP news article is published in multiple online newspapers – so why should I pay for ANY news when papers simply syndicate much of the same content?
But – for truly unique news, unique content – why not charge per article? When I use news search or search for news, I look for the news – not the news paper. Yet online newspapers ask for subscriptions – that’s exactly what I DON’T want to do! I don’t want a friggin newspaper – i just want the article.
Another revenue model should be to charge for syndication. It’s easy to use feeds and publish them on other sites. Why not charge online publishers to use the feeds? I have seen some do that, but mainly in specialty news sites. Most newspapers do not charge publishers who reparse feeds on their own sites. Of course that makes it hard for common readers to use RSS – so what can be done?
Right now…I dont know – I think of the ideas.
Leave a Comment
Pages: 1 2 next page »
Tags: business_models and online_newspapersArticle Sponsor
More Features
-
Loading ...
Latest News
- Hulu’s Bringing Its “A” Game But… March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – Hulu’s sales team is actively subverting the ad [...] more »
- Yelp! A class-action suit? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – One of three civil suits against Yelp filed [...] more »
- Viacom Accuses Google; Testing Digital Millennium Copyright Act March 19th 2010 Viacom has accused Google of turning a blind eye to [...] more »
- Google to Leave China April 10th? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – According to the China Business News, Google Inc [...] more »
- [x+1] Creates The Smartest Tagging System Around March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Today, if you happen to be at the [...] more »
- IAB’s Video Standards Tackled By ADTECH March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – ADTECH, a part of AOL Advertising and an [...] more »
- Google Search and Mobile and….TV? Oh My! March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Google wants to dominate your screens…. Not just [...] more »
Features
- Growing Pains March 19th 2010
- For Better or For Worse? March 18th 2010
- Yahoo! Wants to Get More Personal March 17th 2010
- Creative Considerations for the iPad March 16th 2010
- Amazon Leaves Colorado Affiliates Out in the Cold March 12th 2010
Spotlight
AdBidCentral’s CEO, Vivek Veeraraghavan Talks Openly*What was the inspiration to start AdBidCentral? The conditions that inspired AdBidCentral came from a variety of factors in my personal [...] more...
Reader Favorites
Classifieds
- Sr Director, Marketing Services
- Senior Web Analyst
- Account Director
- Director of Analytics
- Manager, Business and Trade Media Relations
Recent Comments
- Jedd Gould: I think you miss the point. Publications have to charge because the content most are
- Gavin Dunaway: They're similar, but Ning is more a competitor to Facebook and MySpace while StumbleUpon considers
- Steve Feldman: Does StumbleUpon compete with and does essentially what Ning networks does?
- Bulent: I wonder how many of the clients would accept a media plan, that would -as
