Quote:
Originally Posted by PornMD
This is one of the changes they need to make. They may be failing, but that doesn't mean charging for news is the answer...it's far from the only option they have to save themselves. |
Exactly. Here, b/c I'm procrastinating doing what I'm supposed to be doing I'll break it down a little more for those who think pay-walls will work.
1.) Newspaper / Print offline model -- subscriptions barely cover the cost of publication,
the money is made from two sources of advertising: large advertisers and classifieds.
a.) Large advertisers are still around.
b.) Classifieds has been decimated by craigslist and ebay.
outcome => money made from advertising (except for high-ends like economist, new yorker etc... the shit you put around our house to impress people ;) )
2.) Newspaper/Print online model --
a.) Large advertisers are around but pay pennies for branding campaigns.
b.) Classifieds are basically non existent save major high markets
(e.g. NYtimes real estate)
So, given newspapers essentially have a large chunk of their news from similar sources:
ap, reuters, upi, syndicated cartoons, syndicated columnists ....before we finally get to local sports and local news.
Newspapers do not have that much content that is actually unique that is not covered by other news outlets -- local tv, local radio, and now local bloggers.
Say we add subscriptions into the mix -- well instantly you have killed your chances at advertising revenue -- online ad rev is about volume.
How much are you going to charge those visitors that have to have local news?
How easy would it be for a blogger along with a staff of 10 home-based workers to REPLICATE your index of unique content by simply rewriting, attributing and following up every single unique local source? (this is an extreme example, but it is basically gawker.com and other clever aggregators work).
There are projects like everyblock.com that are already going for micro crowd-sourced news.
etc.