Mashablereports that the popular news site will start using a fee-based system. NYMag.com explains that the Times is looking into three types of pay strategies:
One option was a more traditional pay wall along the lines of The Wall Street Journal, in which some parts of the site are free and some subscription-only… Another option was the metered system. The third choice, an NPR-style membership model, was abandoned last fall, two sources explained. The thinking was that it would be too expensive and cumbersome to maintain because subscribers would have to receive privileges
It could be argued that the New York Times is one of the remaining “old media” papers which has managed to make it on-line without needing to charge for content. The website has some of the largest traffic of any English-news website, attracting visitors from not only the local NY area but from all over the world. Charging users for content would reduce the number of visitors and overall ad revenue. A paid service called TimesSelectwas ended by the company in 2007 after it met widespread criticism. Tom Friedman, a multiple-Pulitzer prize winning columnist for the Times, explained how the paid service meant readers in East Asia lost out:
As we got into it, it was clear to me I was getting cut off from a lot of my readers in India and China where 50 dollars per year would be equal to a quarter of college tuition. I used to read you before you went behind the wall.
However, charging for stories would probably raise more revenue than advertising, leaving the company with a difficult decision to make: to leave the service completely free and lose money, to charge all users and make a profit but lose readers or to only charge high-volume users, as WSJ does at the moment.
What do you think? Should old-media news outlets charge for content, possibly allowing for more innovation or should they continue to struggle with little money coming in from advertising? Leave your comments below!
I meant to blog about this earlier, but I received my complimentary copy of the book “We Feel Fine” in the mail two weeks ago! I know I suck! lol Anyway, one of my pictures that I took back in 2008 with my iPhone 3G was included in the book.
It was really surprising because I had forgotten all about it at first. We Feel Fine is an awesome project, from Sep Kamvar and Jonathan Harris, came my way totally by happen-stance. The long and short of how I got this book with my little picture in it goes like so: I was at the mall one day and I saw the Christmas tree in one of the main open areas and snapped a pic of it with my iPhone. I think a long time later I received a message on Flickr.com about submitting my picture to the We Feel Fine Project. At the time I didn’t know what that meant, but I later learned that they were making it into a book. Now that I think about it, I blogged about this back in 2008. You can read the long version of this story here.
I just want to say thank you so much to Jonathan and Sep. Your project rocks!
Watch this amazing conceptual video on the impact of merging print and digital media into handheld devices–touch navigation devices (think, iPhone). More importantly this makes me think of the very exciting emergence of Apple’s “tablet” touch computer. And as an aside, I formerly wasn’t thrilled at the idea of a tablet computer, but now after watching this video I find the idea very intriguing. I am very enthusiastic to see how we begin to absorb our media and through what means, in light of where we currently are between the two worlds of print and digital. This is hard for me to put into words as to where I am going with this, but if you watch the video I guess, you’ll see my frame of mind.
At any rate, this video also led me to think in a slightly different direction: My biggest question is are we presently witnessing a transition from one to the other (print to digital), or are we witnessing a merge where both can steadily coexist in a symbiotic manner? If you’ve seen the film “State of Play” starring Russell Crowe and Rachel McAdams you’ll definitely understand where I’m coming from with this question. It’s refreshing and exciting to ponder. Or I’m just a strange geek…I don’t know. lol
What do you think about what I’ve brought up here and what do you think about the video?
Below are the notes for the video above.
This conceptual video is a corporate collaborative research project
initiated by Bonnier R&D into the experience of reading magazines on
handheld digital devices. It illustrates one possible vision for
digital magazines in the near future, presented by our design partners
at BERG.
The concept aims to capture the essence of magazine reading, which
people have been enjoying for decades: an engaging and unique reading
experience in which high-quality writing and stunning imagery build up
immersive stories.
The concept uses the power of digital media to create a rich and
meaningful experience, while maintaining the relaxed and curated
features of printed magazines. It has been designed for a world in
which interactivity, abundant information and unlimited options could
be perceived as intrusive and overwhelming.
The purpose of publishing this concept video is first and foremost to
spark a discussion around the digital reading experience in general,
and digital reading platforms in particular. Thus, we would be more
than happy to hear what you have to say regarding the concept and
ideas expressed in the video: the magazine reading experience, digital
browsing, text versus images, as well as hear about your own digital
reading experiences and thoughts. We are all ears.
What strikes me is that this is a potentially emotional exchange to what should be a simple choice of data management. Think about it. If you remove someone as a friend, it says something more than just a line of data, doesn’t it? There’s an emotional transference. Some of you will argue that there shouldn’t be, or that someone should get over it, or whatever, but for the most part, I’d say that people who use social networks extensively (versus people trying to plumb the system for business purposes) would feel a little something, should they find themselves defriended.
It says you’re not important. It says you’re no longer relevant. It says you’re no longer entitled to a more intimate view and sharing. There are lots of potential combinations to feel when one is unfollowed or defriended.
I think that I am unfollowed on Twitter every other week, and for every one that departs, I gain two shortly after, give or take. My thoughts are, when I do rarely take the time to look at my follower count, I think, “Oh. Oh, well. Peace!” and then I move on. I get it. I wasn’t interesting. Nothing personal, no offense taken. Peace out!
What I don’t get is the emotionalism that some folks go through. In my view, if the person left and you weren’t already talking closely with this person, then it wasn’t a loss, but rather a gain. I cherish my solitude, probably too much, but I digress… Think about it. The people you do build deep meaningful relationships with online will obviously stay with you, and those with whom you have no connection don’t really matter. I know that may seem cold to you, but I think it guards one from having an unhealthy relationship with social networking itself–lest you begin to exhibit what I call the Creepy Factor, just a little too overly zealous. In other words, some people follow Buddha, some Allah, some Jesus Christ and some Steve Jobs (jk). But then there are the Tweetheads and The Church of Zuckerberg of the Book of Faces (Facebook). I jest, but seriously. Dude!?
Being able to get up and walk away from the computer, iPhone, or MyTouch after talking with these folks is necessary. I swear, there are people that spend large portions of their day on Twitter and Facebook. I almost fell into that trap. A had a realization that before these networks, people were living their lives just fine. And if tomorrow all three major social networks blew up (I’m dramatic, get over it), my life wouldn’t end. I’d miss the convenience, but I’d get over and life will go on. Detachment is vital.
Also, I will confess that I have a come hither mentality. I’m not really going to go too far out of my way to connect with people online unless I really want to form a lasting mutual online friendship that, if attempted, could be a real life friendship or business relationship. That’s one way I separate the goats from the sheep. A lot of people on Twitter appear to be what I call seasonal followers or opportunists–here for a time and then gone or here to use you then gone. The one’s who hang around and actually talk back to me, I keep or I stick around for them and have great conversations with them. That may be bad, but I’m finding it hard to change. My relationships–whatever level they may be–work like my heart: When you’re in, you’re in. And when you’re out, you’re out.
Oh, one clarification. I’m not trying to say that it’s bad to have an emotional response when someone unfollows or defriends you. I’m actually differentiating between a healthy and potentially unhealthy emotional response to being unfollowed or defriended. I implied that, if you don’t really know the person that left you, what the french fry are you fretting over?! There’s a balance I think.
I was invited to go but can’t. That’s the long and short of this video. Wish I could go, but I am glorying in the fact that I have a small victory of being recognized and at least invited to attend. I think it says a lot.
I’m currently in a mad rush to finish reading an advance copy of a book due out in November 2009 by Darren Barefoot Julie Szabo. This book is a phenomenal read and is titled “Friends with Benefits: A Social Media Marketing Handbook”. Before I go on, I just want to put it out there that I was thrown by the title at first. In other words, I was confused about the authors meaning until I continued reading the rest of the title, “A Social Media Marketing Handbook” after which I grabbed my gut and had a big chuckle to myself as continued reading the press release. Just thought I’d share that little anecdote.
Without doing a direct quote from the book, there is a part that addresses honesty and authenticity on the internet through social media, be it via a blog, YouTube, Twitter, etc. The example used in the book was the lonelygirl15 marketing scheme that was, to my recollection, both lauded and looked down upon (Read this and this as examples). On the one hand it was incredibly cool that this so-called video blogger named “Bree” (16 years old) also known as lonelygirl15 on YouTube, was actually a 19-year old actress–which was astoundingly clever. But on the other hand, this reveal was bittersweet in that it immediately alienated the fans and betrayed the cool-factor of how transparent Bree was and the authenticity of what she talked about in her videos.
The good part of that “experiment” is that it served as a litmus test if you will, for just how people want use the internet and the immensely strong resolve for how people want to connect with others online. The closeness of getting to learn about a person who seemed to have no reason to lie about what she shared was betrayed. Fans were inadvertently made the butt of what effectively came across as a viral marketing trick. The feeling of connectedness with Bree and her honesty was amazing and it made you feel like you (the viewer and fan) were friends with a real person. While the medium (the internet) is virtual the desire to connect with real people real, and the eventual relationships that people do build via the many tools on the internet, (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Viddler, Blogger, etc) are also real–NEVER forget this! (As an aside, other iterations of this marketing scheme were used, but in a way that wasn’t alienating by virtue of the kind of content that was being marketed–in this case a film along the lines of the shaky Blair Witch camera film style. For example, the video clips that were posted to the internet and passed off as if they were real to market the film “Cloverfield”, by my standards, was a sheer genius means of getting the film known and built a strong following before it’s release. Learn more… with J.J.’s Viral ‘Clovefield’ Diary)
A real, genuine, and positive testament to what kind of community could have continued around lonelygirl15 before news broke of it’s falsehood, were she blond, 25 and an even more active video blogger, is the very real, Justine Ezarik of ijustine.com. She has a huge following–primarily young females–and most of what she does is in real time, in that she shoots a lot of video and posts it to the web relatively close to the time she shot it. She essentially streams a portion of her life on the internet, interacts with her fans, or friends as she puts it, via different social networking sites, and even features them in her own mini web show, “Ask iJ“. The majority of the tools that she uses are free social networks that she uses to share and connect. More importantly, I haven confirmed whether she did this on purpose or it just happened this way, but all the internet tools that she uses and what she does with them now serve as her calling card or business card as far as her personal Brand “iJustine” is concerned. Finally, all of this is done in a positive way that is honest, authentic and non-alienating to her fans and business partners, while never compromising her own privacy and safety.
Authenticity goes a long, long way and that is what continues to amaze me so much about this present phase in our age of the internet.
In closing, I’ll give a more thorough review once I’ve gotten through this book.
