DISQUS

David Semeria · 5 months ago

Why don't they consider usage billing? The blog post contains a specific example of a usage-based newspaper.

JAG · 5 months ago

I don't think charging for online reading will turn out to be a successful business strategy. Many of the NYT topics are covered elsewhere where the content is free. The internet was set up to make information more readily available to everyday users; by charging for perusal goes against the dominant trend of the basic internet service. Readers will simply seek their information elsewhere.

Sam · 4 months ago

Ah, the neive "it's got to be free because it's on the Internet argument"

Conrad Buck · 5 months ago

The newspaper and magazine industry needs to look at physical print in a different light. As soon as the internet had a mass audience, the first thing they did was replicate their print editions entirely online. Now they are scratching their heads when the digital versions with high startup costs drained all the money from the print editions and today the digital editions don't make up the advertising revenues that the print editions once had.

The NYT, especially needs to revamp it's print edition. Print is not dead. If you have the same content online for free as you do in printed format then don't be surprised when a high percentage of readers switch to the free edition. Simply stating that "well some people still like to read news on paper." That generation is thinning out.

What the NYT needs to do is revolutionize their print edition. Give the reader a reading experience that they CANNOT GET ONLINE. Photography, in-depth stories, whole features with fold out pages, maps etc. Print something that people will buy to spend all week reading. Look at Monocle magazine. If you thumb through it, you can never duplicate that reading experience online. That's their angle, print should be a PREMIUM product. Keep NYT.com for day to day news, breaking news, blogs etc where everyone can have their soapbox.

J.Garcia · 4 months ago

Great suggestions. Personally I can't remember the last time I picked up a newspaper to get information. I often grab what I need from their website.

Conrad Buck · 4 months ago

My point entirely. I grab what I need from the web but come the weekend, I still like to browse through unfiltered content in physical format. The weekend edition of newspaper are still big sellers despite the weekday editions slumping. It's a completely different reading experience.

Great discussion anyway, I enjoy hearing other views!!!!

Gadget Sleuth · 5 months ago

Conrad: I don't agree. I think with the advent of the internet (and its now pretty much mass availability), print is more less dead. The business structure that allowed it to function and "work" has changed too much for print to ever be really profitable again.

I'd say within 75-100 years, everything will be online and print as we know it now won't exist.

Conrad Buck · 5 months ago

<Gadget Sleuth

I agree with you. It's easy to slow down or steer a small boat compared to a oil tanker which takes 30 miles to stop. The fact that we are already there and the past 10 years has not changed anything with relation to large media business structure was inevitable.

I still believe there are opportunities for printed reading in more premium format.

Of course in the next 75-100 yrs print will be dead. That's a no brainer but the next 5-10 years? Ebooks will start the downward spiral of the paperback? Mass availability really will trample on the "culture" of reading physical print?

Michael K · 4 months ago

I pay to read the Wall Street Journal online because it has content not available anywhere else.

The NY Times' content is quite as unique. The majority of what you can read there is duplicated at other news sites.