There are two interesting developments in the world of newspapers and digital today.
First up is Rupert Murdoch who’s reported to be introducing a charge for reading currently free newspapers on the internet. He’s looked at the model operated by the Wall Street Journal and wants to roll out some kind of system to his other newspapers.
Newspapers face the problem that as circulations fall and page impressions on websites rise, the advertising from their online offerings doesn’t make up for the lost print revenue. Major US newspapers are crumbling (The Boston Globe was the latest teetering on the edge), and as the internet effectively has infinite inventory for advertising, if we’re not careful, prices will only go in one direction – and it’s not up.
From a consumer’s point of view, news has become free. They’re used to that model on TV and radio. And despite attempts from various publishers online, that’s the case with the internet too. Even in print, many are able to read free newspapers.
The problem that Murdoch faces is that unless a lot of his competitors also introduce pay models, it’s going to be hard for his titles to go it alone. If I can’t read the story free on Timesonline, why don’t I just go to Telegraph.co.uk? Then there’s always BBC News…
The Wall Street Journal has valuable time sensitive data with an audience that will pay for it. The same can be said of the FT – it has put its cover price up from £1 to £2 in less than two years. Basically, FT readers are price insensitive to a large extent. They need the paper, and it’s entirely possible that their office pays for it anyway. Like the Wall Street Journal, the FT charges beyond a certain level for access to its website.
But at the moment, news from News Corporation’s websites can usually be found somewhere else free of charge. It’s a dilemma.
I think the key to this will be to find a workable micropayment system, or a value-added subscription scheme. The Independent had a go for a while, but eventually failed. Charging small amounts via cards is not very workable. If The Times included access to its enormous archive (stretching back to 1785) then that’d be an interesting idea. It wouldn’t work for everybody, because not all of us are interested in that kind of historic information. I’ll wait with interest to see what Murdoch comes up with.
The other part of this story is the new Kindle that Amazon has announced in the US – the Kindle DX. This device is specifically aimed at reading magazines and newspapers. I’ve not tried a Kindle – they’ve not been released in the UK – but I understand that reading a newspaper on it required a bit too much scrolling or removed a lot of the serendipity of the printed page which had stories you mightn’t look at until your eye was caught by them.
The price is pretty high at $489, but there will be “a steep discount on the Kindle if they buy a long term subscription and there is no home delivery in their area.”
This is the model that I think is probably the future of these devices. Sell me it like a mobile phone – cheap or even free if I take an 18 month contract out. Then deliver the new edition early each morning automatically, and give me updates through the day – especially if there’s breaking news.
The home delivery proviso is odd, and suggests that papers are still trying to hang on to their paper readership. Initially at least, those readers are more valuable, and the discounting scheme is to grow readership albeit earning less from those additional readers.
Exactly the extent of the discount doesn’t seem to be known yet. But the mobile phone model is the one to look at.
In time, there’ll be improved iterations of the Kindle and its rivals. Colour screens have to be next – newspapers have invested millions in full colour presses, so although digital copies are fully searchable, readers are missing out on photography.
But this is a fascinating development, and it’ll be interesting to see who’s first to try this model in the UK.