Your Content Better Be Good

Continuing on the previous theme, Rich Boehne, the CEO of E.W. Scripps Co. seems to agree, at least in theory as he stated: “If you are going to launch a paywall, the content better be good. You can’t take products that we cut and diminish and then put up a paywall.” at last week’s Key Executives Mega-Conference. Paywalls (or more properly, paid access to content) works well when the content is important / compelling to its readers and not available elsewhere. They don’t work well when it’s not important / compelling and readily available. When your content is consistently good, and you stick to a your plan, you can realize tremendous success - just ask the FT who expects to make the “crossover” this year with digital subscriber revenue outpacing digital ad revenue.

Read More from: News & Tech

Does the Future of Print lie in Time Sensitivity?

It’s becoming clear that time sensitivity could be the critical success factor for print. Let me explain. In a time sensitivity based model, publishers leverage their print products to provide depth and quality while allowing their digital products to primarily focus on the right here and now. In this model, multi-channel publishers would deliver a combination of ad supported, real-time news online (ideally via mobile optimized content / apps) and subscription / payment supported in-depth analysis in print AND digital.

This hybrid model allows the publishers to accomplish multiple objectives including retaining (growing?) a print subscriber base (for a product that has true shelf live and legacy value - depth and analysis never go out of style) and growing profitable digital engagement (via improved ad unit development and commerce tie ins on breaking news, customers who want access to the depth and analysis digitally, as well as access to the archive itself). While this may not be a complete answer, it’s definitely an opportunity worthy of consideration as it’s far more engaging than slamming a nondescript paywall in front of commodity content and hoping for the best.

Read More from: Pew Research | Thinking Out Loud

Limited Access v. Added Value, A Pay Wall Debate

Limiting access to content hasn’t been the right answer for anything on the web, and it isn’t suddenly going to become the right answer for news on the web, either.

Rather than trying to limit content, publishers need to experiment with the ways they engage their readers.

No one can begrudge a publisher for needing to realize additional revenue from their news content. In most instances, the news isn’t researched or written for free. However, everyone should “begrudge” the publishers for continually going back to a dry well - “off the shelf pay walls”.

Two simple “pay to play” ideas that need to receive significantly more exploration are:

  • Limited ad content - remove a significant number of the ads from the content and allow the premium customer to select which advertisers they wish to receive ads from.
  • Ad free content - remove all ads from the content and offer the reader the right to pay for this privilege. 

With everyone from the WSJ, NYT and Washington Post to the MN StarTribune working at finding ways to cut their content off from readers with pay walls, it would be nice to see some organizations step up and offer value in exchange for an increased cost.

The speed of experimentation and testing around “pay to play” news needs to accelerate, rapidly. If it doesn’t, we are all going to be watching truly great resources vanish.