The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Who will pay for online news? > Comments

Who will pay for online news? : Comments

By Terry Flew, published 8/9/2009

It is debateable as to whether news consumers will accept paying for something they are currently getting for free.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Terry you said,

"At any rate, I doubt that Shaun Carney is right that consumers will simply accept paying for what they are currently getting for free simply because they recognise the costs that exist for the established news providers".

I agree. There is so much free info from quality public radio and television broadcasters, as well as free online material from quality blogs, that suggests that online newspapers will struggle for the same readership when the consumer has to pay.

Bad luck for domestic newspapers, but life goes on with an abundance of info still out there.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 8:40:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I definitely won't be paying if they introduce charges, I might even go back to buying a paper occasionally. Which I still do.
Posted by JamesH, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 9:00:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Would you pay a subscription to a news source that changes with the winds of populism? Probably not for very long, e.g Crikey changed from middle of the road to an aggressive eco flavored (no agreement means you're a WACKO!), conservative bashing, gossip site I don't bother with anymore.

The older generation was brought up on "news at 6", as a way of finding out what's going on, there was only the morning (sometimes evening) papers as an alternative.

You can get a scan from free news sources, keeping in mind their political and populist cultures, instantly, without bothering with stuff you don't care about.

The Americans, (as ever), lead the way in their use of the internet, to focus on narrow specialist interest areas, which reflects their education system and lifestyles. There is so much information about anything you want to be involved in, world or regional news is less important.

The news outlets will have to get used to the fact that not very many people will want such deep analysis, this will become the domain ($) of the people who want that level of examination.

In short, news and opinion, like everything else on the internet, will find its place but I expect it will struggle for attention.

News will fracture, so sports news will have it's own domain as will cooking, lifestyle, trading, business. If you want news on your particular interest area, motorcycling, adversarial needlepoint, fashion, dog showing etc you already know that the news sites don't cater for you and you've found sites that do.

The days of conglomerates being able to control an entire market area are over and niche players are taking over, with other sources of revenue.

BTW - I will pay online for a subscription to, say a woodworking site for instance where I know everything there is of interest to me, but not for a news outlet, as I mention above where opinions and news is political and populist - if I'm paying, I better get what I want.

That's the new world order.
Posted by rpg, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 9:50:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Like most articles on this subject this one is written from a perspective of the media business and not the media consumer.
Firstly I think the media has more than a few tickets on themselves. They see themselves as the gatekeepers and the professionals that are the only ones who can be entrusted to deliver "news" to the rest of us. They think their musings and scribblings are worth something. Pity journalists are seen by many as the scum of the earth. Arrogant, elitist little spivs who use words to distort and sensationalise. They exploit people and issues to sell their papers and then wonder why we wont pay.

News, music and ideas are all free now. Wether they like it or not the producers of these commodities have been usurped and they have lost the ability to rip us off as they have been doing for so long. The best bit is society will benefit greatly from the free flow of ideas, news, music and technology. Allowing groups of people to monopolise and control media and information has been holding humanity back for many years and the sooner patents, copyright and all other forms of "intellectual property" are reformed or removed the better off we will all be as a community. Even if people like Rupert Murdoch are made into poor people as a result it will be worth it. We dont need people like him deciding what we read and learn of the world. I love being able to access many different news sources and with new technology it will just become more and more accessible and more and more free.

Good luck with the pay wall guys I for one will just find my news elsewhere.
Posted by mikk, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 2:34:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mikk, love your work and ocmpletely aagree with you.

journalism will go the way of buggy whip makers as a skill.

Everyone can and will be a reporter. All we want is the facts, not the incessant commentry of some egotistical arts grad.

The world market for information has changed.
Posted by odo, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 3:35:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Part of the problem is that newspapers have always money through advertising. If you start to charge people to read your news then less people will do it than if it was free. When less people view your news the value of advertising with that news declines and you make less money. So charging the consumers, who in effect provide the value for your advertising, can be a high risk strategy.

Maybe Mr Murdoch should actually be complaining about the advertisers who are not willing to pay as much for advertising online as they were for advertising in print as this is the real threat to his newspaper business model in the conversion from paper to the Internet and analogue to digital.
Posted by Mickey K, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 5:10:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy