Publisher – We’re moving to subs model because we’re better than biased and inaccurate bloggers
NZ title National Business Review is the latest to move to a paid subscription model for some of its online content.
The title says it will be asking for $149 for six months’ access to the title’s premium online content.
In a letter to subscribers to NBR’s daily email, publisher Barry Colman said that about 20% of the content – “the best news stories, scoops and commentary pieces” – would become subscription only. He said:
“As you know, there has been endless discussion for a number of years about the crazy model adopted by newspapers in most parts of the free world in which they pay the enormous costs of running professional newsrooms only to give their content away free – while at the same time slashing newsroom numbers to save money as circulation and advertising revenues fall.
>>The alternative is newsrooms decimated to the point of processing public relations handouts or unedited government propaganda from their fully staffed team of spin doctors.”<<
hasn't read a newspaper in a while, has he?
what he’s saying isn’t entirely incorrect though. a bit sweeping, perhaps, but if you look at many of the business blogs they’re exactly that.
Bollocks
Them sound like fighting words.
To pay or not to pay seems to be the question on everyone’s lips and the subject has certainly polarised opinions.
The current model clearly isn’t working as well as publishers initially hoped so it’s good to see them trying something different.
Time will tell if it works but it’ll be very interesting to see the audience figures over the next 6-12 months.
he’s right, most business blogs are simply uninformed opinion and couldn’t exist without news gathering and editing by skilled journalists and editors
stu, I think that comment could be extended to nearly all blogs out there.
“the model has spawned a huge band of amateur, untrained, unqualified bloggers”
since when did you need a qualification to start a blog?
I’m looking forward to the business model of commercial legacy media collapsing!
No doubt the way newspapers work now isn’t sustainable.
But aren’t newspapers simply a way to connect something people want (journalism) with the people that want it?
Surely the balance of power now lies with the journalists, who can now work singly or in co-operatives (just as musicians like Radiohead have done) to provide their skills without a publisher taking the lion’s share of the proceeds?
It’s not the journalism that’s obsolete. Publishers charging people for content will simply hasten their own demise.
“Surely the balance of power now lies with the journalists, who can now work singly or in co-operatives (just as musicians like Radiohead have done) to provide their skills without a publisher taking the lion’s share of the proceeds?”
It’s true, now they are entirely empowered to make 100% of the nothing they’ll be paid to write their blogs.
I’ve always found it ironic that journalists say bloggers are unqualified when nearly all journalists start the trade having studied journalism…and not the subject area they write on.
Like most ecommerce offerings – online subscriptions has rarely lived up to expectations. Readers will always expect more (quality and quantity) online.
Good luck to them.
I hope they can make that work but lets see a follow up article with an accurate number of paid subscribers, uniques and page impressions in 3 months compared to their current figures.
That would be very interesting and helpful for everyone.
And once again – no one is addressing the key issue here – that someone, somewhere has to pay the cost of creating content. I do not believe that the future lies in the hands of an army of unpaid amateurs. At its heart this move is about recovering costs. I think it will fail, just as every other attempt to take back what was once free has failed. There are only a handful of publishers making the paid online subscription model work in this region right now – such as Crikey – I just stumped up for my annual subscription because I truly value it – and I was never able to get it free of charge and so therefor don’t resent paying for it.
Duncan, you shouldn’t find it ironic “that journalists say bloggers are unqualified when nearly all journalists start the trade having studied journalism…and not the subject area they write on”. Journalism at its core is about the news gathering and reporting process, not subject matter expertise. The skill is in investigation, evaluation and communication and is transferable across topics. Naturally, with experience comes knowledge and greater critical capacity, hence the the rise of the opinion columnist. The problem with most bloggers is that go straight to opinion yet possess no journalistic skills nor the occupational prerogative to strive for balance. In any event. having knowledge of a subject doesn’t qualify a person to write about it – as we can see from the banal or prejudiced content of most blogs, which are nothing more than vanity projects.
A bit of a tangent here, but I’m finding it hard to reconcile these hallowed journalists referred to in the comments with this recent article on Mumbrella https://mumbrella.com.au/journos-like-free-stuff-to-grab-their-attention-7269
*sits waiting for the a maelstrom of outraged responses to start*
Trust those upstart Kiwis…but strength to their arm.
Like many Mumbrella followers, I well remember the mid 90s when old media was contorting itself trying to work out how to monetise its output with the new technology at its disposal. The big publishers destroyed millions chasing various rainbows before deciding to turn iconic mastheads such as The SMH, The Oz and The Bulletin into local e-rags by giving their pearls away online in the hope that ads would keep the business model afloat. Lunacy.
When you make something free you cripple its value – in any language, in any business, at anytime, anywhere. As Brad Howarth says, if people believe something is worth paying for, they’ll pay.
One group of publishers have known this all along. The leaders then – and now – were (are) the pornographers. They knew they had something of worth that people wanted. The technology just made it easier to deliver. Happy to give away only little tastes of their gems, the porn kings and queens made a fortune by charging for their output – online and off. Now they own homes in the south of France.
As the good folk of Business Spectator seem to be finding out.
Most of you are defining blogs too narrowly. Not all blogs feed off existing media. I write a hyperlocal blog about Fitzroy in Melbourne. My qualification? I live in Fitzroy and have a good eye for detail, a digital camera and the ability to publish two stories a day.
As a blogger I rely on legacy media for nothing. I comment on their stories sometimes and sometimes they steal my content, and I embarrass them by winning Australian Press Council complaints against them and publishing stories about how they breach the copyrights of bloggers.
The food and art bloggers in Melbourne cover these areas in far greater depth, breadth and vitality than commercial media does. We give content away partially because we enjoy creating it and partially because we enjoy showing how inadequate commercial media is.
Blogs are like the Dems. They’re useful in keeping the bastards honest, but give ’em the whole box and dice to run and they’ll not be able to pull it off.