JULY 23, 2009 2:37PM

N.Y. Times talks about online pay plans

Rate: 8 Flag

By Katharine Mieszkowski: Details about the New York Times' plans to charge readers of its Web site for access are trickling out. In a conference call to discuss earnings today, CEO Janet Robinson described two possible payment scenarios -- a "meter model" or a "Times club membership."

Notably, the two models the Times is considering seem diametrically opposed in their approach. "A metered model, in which readers would be charged based on how many pages they view, would effectively create a negative incentive for readership, depressing the value of the paper's online advertising," writes Jeff Bercovici on AOL's finance site. "A membership model, on the other hand, would lavish perks on the most enthusiastic readers -- perhaps invitation-only live events, or online chats with op-ed columnists."

The Times reported that Internet advertising revenue in the second quarter fell 15.5 percent compared to the same period a year-ago, according to Editor and Publisher. But the Internet now accounts for about 21 percent of the Times' advertising revenue, up from about 18 percent last year.

CEO Robinson hinted that the newspaper's Web site might charge for access as soon as this fall. As we've noted before, many other large news organizations, such as Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., are flirting with introducing pay walls, too. They all might benefit from reading Jeff Sonderman's short history lesson about the price of newspapers at NewsFuturist.

 

Your tags:

Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I don't see how they're diametrically opposed. Especially if you make the metered model a category formula. Instead of charging per click, they could charge a subsription rate that would entitle someone to 10 clicks/day. A higher subscription for 20. This makes sense, given the different reading habit of international vs. resident readers. And you can also have premium memberships that entitle you to on line chats, etc.
If the Times starts charging to read their content, I'll simply do what I did before when they had part of their content behind a pay-wall: stop reading it and go elsewhere.

I would add that they reveal just how unfamiliar they are with an online model by talking about metering "per page." "Pages" are a matter of formatting; they can be as small or as large as you like. I have read web pages that are single paragraphs, and ones that are entire books. What would constitute a "page" to the NY Times?

Further, their online display model is heavily influenced by their hardcopy model, with multiple "pages" per story. Why wouldn't I feel ripped off by the Times if they make a 7 paragraph story 2 pages rather than one? How would they count a navigation page, one that for example looks like the front page of the Wall Street Journal's hard-copy edition, a "page" that contains a single paragraph or sentence from multiple stories? What about aggregators?

No, once again, a major print media distributor has displayed tons of ignorance about the market. Shocker.
As the CIA's paper of record, I think that the NY Times ought to be made available free of charge, much like CNN... paying for propaganda? No, no, no, no, no.