Press to Pay

I’m in two minds about paying for online content. On the one hand, the thought of paying for what has always been virtually free seems a ludicrous concept – and not one I am eager to embrace. On the other hand, it seems thoroughly unfair that journalists are expected to churn out articles that merit a price in one medium but are given away for free in another.

So is paying for online content ever likely to be a success?

Rupert Murdoch certainly thinks so. He has been advocating a shift in strategy for months and believes the public should be paying for their news online. “Quality journalism is not cheap, and an industry that gives away its content is simply cannibalizing its ability to produce good reporting”

But if you can access free and good quality news, why on earth would you pay for it elsewhere? A recent survey suggested that 9 out of 10 Briton’s would definitely not pay for news online. However people did say they would never pay for satellite TV, yet Sky has been a huge success. One major barrier for newspapers implementing payment for online news is the BBC. The British Broadcasting Corporation has created a notion that news should be free and newspapers simply can’t compete with such a service.

However, Adam Timworth, Head of blogging communication for Reed Business Information believes a compromise can be found. He says it’s important for websites/online news sites to span both a private and public audience. The private content, which is hidden from general consumption, is where the website makes its money through subscriptions. This has been particularly successful in Business and Trade news where in depth information on a niche subject is provided. However, it is essential that websites also offer a platform to engage with a wider audience. Maintaining a flowing conversation with their readers can be achieved through forums and comment/opinion sections. A further layer to this communication can be developed through the distribution of free forums such as blogs or wikis.

It seems to me that print media are caught in a catch 22. If they charge for content online, they will alienate their readers who will opt to consume news for free elsewhere. But if they don’t charge, their steady decline is likely to continue as no profits are made. However, one inexorable constant remains; the pubic demand for news and information means there is plenty of work for journalists to embrace.  However, is generating frequent and good quality journalism realistically sustainable without the funds to do so?  If a journalist is not paid for their work, does that mean anyone who puts pen to paper or consistently writes a blog is deemed a journalist too?  A journalist is paid for writing with credibility, revealing the truth and backing news stories up with researched facts - this is their job, this is how they earn their living.  Could free online news eventually leave journalists penniless?