Jan. 20th 2010, The New York Times Company announced that it will charge online readers for access to NYTimes.com.
"Starting in January 2011, a visitor toNYTimes.com will be allowed to view a certain number of articles free each month; to read more, the reader must pay a flat fee for unlimited access. Subscribers to the print newspaper, even those who subscribe only to the Sunday paper, will receive full access to the site without any additional charge."
Many media analysts and scholars agree that it is time to figure our a new economic model of news business in the digital media ecology. It is known that 17 million readers a month in the U.S. visit NYTimes.com, but I am not sure how many of them would pay the online subscription fee.
However, what is clear is that the subscription-based, advertising-driven mode of the traditional media business is no longer effective and efficient.
Are you ready to pay online news content?
No, I myself am not ready to pay to see the newspaper or any other kind of print media that i can see on the television. The reason why people view the newspaper online is because its convient, and the reason why people sit through that 30 second advertisement is because it means we get to see the newpaper for free. There is only 3 things i pay for online, bills, shopping and a carfax; and i dont plan on buying a car anytime soon. So no im not ready to pay for any news contenet especially if its online.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure how many people visit and read the online newspaper now. But,the reason why most of people read the online newspaper is free.How many people read the online paper if the company decide to charge on their product? However,it is fact that charging to online stuff will become a new business model for the future.The Kindle or I pad is good example. So, I don't prefer to pay money for reading to the online paper but I think it might become an important business model in the world.
ReplyDeleteBy Fumiya
I think there will always be someone out there to pay for this subscription, although I am not sure how many would. During the economic crisis many people are keeping a closer eye on their spending and I think paying for news on the internet is going to fall low on many people's list. There are other free resources that have the same information and until all the papers make you pay to get their paper online I think this decision isn't the best.
ReplyDeleteDanielle Glenn
As much as I enjoy the New York Times, I would be reluctant to pay for news. There are many sites, like the Huffington Post for example, that are free and so I would probably go in that direction. I do get a physical copy each week of the Financial Times and that came with access to the website as well, which I think is okay, but I would not pay for online access on its own.
ReplyDelete- Rebecca Ayre
I think that having to psy for online news isn't such a big deal. I mean you already have to pay a certain amount each month to have the paper delivered to them so switching to online news for x amount of money a month is basically the same. Some may agrue that its more expensive so its not woth it, but with online news its easier to acess and you can take it with you on your phone or at work, plus if a story gets updated you can read it right away as apposed to having to wait until the next day. So I would say that if someone is very into reading they probably will subscribe to online news.
ReplyDeleteJennell lockhart
I will not pay for online news. There are too many free sources available that can easily be found. Credibility might be a concern, but you still can get about the same information.
ReplyDelete- Zeph Davis
I, for one, will not pay for online news. If/when they start charging, I will simply find other sources to get news from. That is ridiculous. I am sure that there will be some people that will be willing to pay, but I think it is a waste of money to pay for something that you could get elsewhere for free.
ReplyDelete-Dani Manning
I don't believe i would pay for online news i know for sure you can find other more reliable news online that is for free or simply just watch it on TV. I think people that would pay for online news would be the ones who care about news or blog about the news but other than that i dont think anyone else would. Another person that would pay or subscribe for online news would be the news people themselves looking at the competition of how much they should charge.
ReplyDelete--Andrew Archuleta
Newspapers definitely need change, or updating to a digital world if they want to increase their popularity. Charging for on-line information is one way to help make a profit. I'm not sure that is the answer. I receive the New York Time's through e-mail for free. I check it once a week, but I am not a consistent newspaper reader. I enjoy receiving my news through television. Thus, for me I will not pay to get those emails from the Time's. The majority of college students probably will not pay for something they do not need to pay for. The pro for charging is that the Time's become viewed as an elite paper, that might be, worth the charge. The con is some people won't pay for it, and the paper's ratings go down, which means their advertising charge will go down. But again maybe their is enough people who will pay. Only time will tell if it was a good or bad decision. I think it is good that they're trying to change and update the way things are done.
ReplyDeleteSummer Giauque
I think any good business knows that if you start off offering your product for free then decide to start charging, you will lose customers. I personally would not pay for the NY Times. I am under the belief that I can find any information they can offer, on other websites if I'm willing to look for it.
ReplyDeleteCharging for online content is a hard business. You have so much competition with people who are willing to hand their content out for free. I think the Times will get some subscribers, and it may even turn out to be very profitable for then they are one of the number one publications in the country, but I personally would not pay.
This is a hard issue to tackle. The business model is heading in the right direction but keeping the info "private" will be difficult. THere are 1001 ways to get around and password protected area. People share passwords, and info on blogs, facebook, twitter and other social media sites. So I am not opposed to paying for a online subscription but I also think I could find the same info for free given a little time.
ReplyDeleteBy Alan Bodily
I must say that I'm not entirely against the idea of paying to read the news online. Take for example that for year people have paid to have the paper delivered to their door. We have paid for years just to have the privelage to read the news and why not! These people do it as their job! Without subscription fees many americans would be without income.
ReplyDeleteNow I don't believe that I should get charged the same amount as a newspaper subscriber simply because it is a more minimal cost to post articles to the web as opposed to a print news paper. Reduce the fee by half or more and you've got my attention and potentially my money.
I see the need to charge people a fee, but I do not see myself paying for anything like this just yet. There are many more free, trusted, and reliable sources of information still available online, so I feel it would be unnecessary to constrict myself to just the NY TImes.
ReplyDelete--Zeph Davis
I can understand why they feel it is necessary to start requiring subscriptions, considering the size of the paper. I honestly don't believe, however, that a majority of people today will pay to read online. I do think there will be a small percentage of people who will pay for it, but not as much as the NYTimes will probably hope for. I am personally never going to feel the urge to buy news when I can easily and cheaply read print news. I believe that print media will never die.
ReplyDeleteBrenna Oliver
I think that some people go onto the NYTimes website because it is free. It is also one of the most popular newspapers in the United States so it has national events that people want to know about. I think that if they make people pay for online use they will lose the amount of people that visit the website. But I don't think people will mind that much. If they are that interested they shouldn't mind paying for a subscription. And even if they visit the site rarely, it will still be free for just a few articles a month.
ReplyDeleteNo, I wouldn't pay for online news content because i really don't pay attention to the news and when i do i rather just pick up a newspaper!
ReplyDeleteI am willing to bet that a large majority of the 17 million viewers each month end up on the NYT website via search engine. They hear about a plane crash and google it - and it takes them to the NYT article covering the crash. Or local events - weather - etc. I doubt that high number go directly to NYT and just pleasure read. Especially if it was going to be charged. There are so many other resources available on the internet - readers will turn elsewhere for their news and information.
ReplyDeleteAmanda Hansen