S-T To Charge for Online Content?
by Steve SmithIn today’s earnings call, McClatchy CEO Gary Pruitt indicates that paid content could be on the table. Sez PaidContent.com:
Like NYT Editor Bill Keller mused this week, McClatchy execs are considering whether some paid content actually pays off. “Our costs of delivery online is lower, so the distinction between ‘print is pay and online is free’ is wrong. We’ll experiment with paid content online. But most experiments show that you lose more online revenue than you gain per subscriber. And as much as people think newspapers are going out of style, they’re still read by most adults. And it’s worth noting that our cash flow margin was over 20 percent last year.”
On the positive side, online real estate ads managed to grow 15.3 percent in Q4 and autos were up 8.3 percent in December. Also, McClatchy will suspend executives bonuses as part of a wider $300 million savings initiative.
Tags: McClatchy, star-telegram
12 Comments, Comments or Pings
Kris
I feel that this is exactly where newspapers dropped the ball. They should have been charging for this all along. Oh well. A bit late to the party I guess. Look at subscriptions Satellite Radio or Cable TV. I know they are not in great shape either, but charging for this content online makes perfect sense.
Just a rant here but need have a question for all of you blog folks out there
(West and Clear and Fortworthology included).
Where would you get your content if you could not link to standard forms of Media in this town? I know you can spark some very good topics, but you are not paid to research up to the minute news or uncover wrongdoings at City Hall. What are you going to do if there is nothing to link to…youtube? Yes I saw that catch in Right Field at Fenway too. Amazing. Not that any of you are making money on your site, but wont you be out of a gig if you have nothing to link to? BTW: Recent reports state that on-line revenue has stalled out. It is not working as well as projected. What your selling…they ain’t buying gang. Oh except for the Real Estate and Auto Industry…great examples considering where they are right now. There is only one direction to go in those two categories.
I know that newspapers made their bed, but what will all of us (you included) do without them. Please respond.
Feb 5th, 2009
Steve Smith
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of newspapers. I actually subscribe to one. A Star-Telegram hits my front yard every morning. We need reporters who are paid to do nothing but poke sticks at local business and government and ask questions. I’m a believer.
However, if you want to jump on West and Clear and Fort Worthology for being nothing more than link factories, I must respectfully disagree. I’m not afraid to link to a story in another publication that has value to readers here in Fort Worth. Unfortunately, that kind of reciprocity isn’t extended in reverse.
The TCU gas well, the TCU pipeline along Alton Road, Heritage Park crumbling, the Eighth Avenue Drilling Site, many aspects of Near Southside development, the Lone Star International Film Festival, the FW Opera, exhibits at Fort Worth’s world class museums. West and Clear and Fort Worthology generate lots of original content and we often have news here first. Hell, I had a post about the S-T cuts before their own website. I’m proud of the original content that I and my colleagues work together to produce.
Not bad for guys who all have day jobs.
Sorry, Kris. I’m not taking it your are a regular reader. I invite you to check in everyday. We’re actually kind of good at this.
Feb 5th, 2009
John W
Steve, I enjoy the west and clear material (to confess, I primarily enjoy it on Pegasus News), but to Kris’s point, I also think blogs would in general have a tough time if most newspapers kept their treasures in walled gardens.
But in blogs I’m normally looking for something else than “first on the scene.” I’m typically looking for 1) informed opinion and in-depth analysis that draws connections between previous news stories that the OP missed, and 2) someone to sift and aggregate the copious amount of news on the web. It’s the repeated success of thousands of editorial decisions a blogger makes for each post that keep me comng back.
Feb 5th, 2009
Kevin Buchanan
Kris,
Steve has, naturally, said most everything I wanted to say, but I’ll add a little bit sticking up for my own work.
If you actually read Fort Worthology every day, you’d see that the majority of our content is original. Fort Worthology doesn’t depend on linking to the Star-Telegram – in point of fact, the Star-Telegram doesn’t have 1/100th the amount of content about the topics Fort Worthology covers. When it’s not original content, it’s most often links to interesting pieces of original content from other, similarly-themed blogs, or videos. Usually, these are accompanied by our own original content about the topic as well.
Fort Worthology is the only place that covers Fort Worth urbanism. If I was depending on the S-T for topics on that subject, I’d never make more than a post or two a month (I think you’ll find that of our 51 posts in January, most were either all original or links to other blogs’ original work with our own original work to go along with it).
That’s not even talking about the times Fort Worthology has broken stories before the S-T or any of the other local media. We have had more about the streetcar project, often things that you can’t read anywhere else. We broke the Brace Building story before the mainstream – in fact, if you enjoyed Channel 8’s news report about that story not long ago, that’s because Channel 8 learned of it from reading Fort Worthology. We broke the news about Jake’s Hamburgers coming to Downtown (thanks to our readers). Those are just the easy, recent ones off the top of my head.
I’m not saying that to brag. It’s just that when you accuse us of being tied to linking to the big papers, I must point out that reality doesn’t jibe with that. If the Star-Telegram were to disappear today (which I don’t want – I would prefer the S-T stay around and actually, you know, improve), Fort Worthology would still be here. I write plenty of my own content, and I do it because I’m passionate about our subject matter and because other people, clearly, enjoy reading it.
–Kevin
Feb 5th, 2009
Steve Smith
Great analysis, John. Forgive me if I seem a tad defensive. But I’m proud of the work we do.
Feb 5th, 2009
Suzette Watkins
I don’t see that W&C or FortWorthology links to ST too much, if ever! I find that W&C & FortWorthology get their content from different sources. I think the Big Shots at ST and other big businesses have been slow in recognizing and capitalizing on the online demand for services. As a small business owner, I was shocked to find that advertising in print was more expensive than online advertising — I thought that was ass backwards and showed how out-of-touch the Executives were with these big companies.
I love W&C, always have, especially with Steve Smith on board. Same with FortWorthology. I think they are worth their weight in gold for the City of Fort Worth. I surely hope they are making money at blogging, they deserve it — they put in a lot of “blood, sweat & tears” (tears maybe) for this City. It’s a little off the beating path and it’s needed & warranted, imo. I think W&C “links” more to FWWeekly than ST. I hope FWWeekly heeds this warning as well and starts capitalizing on online services.
Feb 5th, 2009
Pete Wann
To John’s point –
What has always infuriated me about print media and traditional journalism is that they INSIST on “balancing” a story, even when the entire concept of “balance” is impossible in a given story.
For example, if I were writing an article on the teaching of Creationism in a public high school science class, I’d be obligated to contact, interview, and likely quote someone who believes that Jesus had pet dinosaurs. That doesn’t balance an article, it just gives credence to a ridiculous position.
I’ve always viewed the role of blogs as both context providers and BS detectors. The papers don’t always get it right, nor do bloggers, but hopefully somewhere in the middle the truth is finally exposed.
Here’s a question for you, Kris — What happens to a community when its newspaper fails? What would happen to Fort Worth if the only paper in the Metroplex was the Morning News with a “Fort Worth bureau”? If advertising isn’t paying the bills for newspapers, then what’s next? What business model WILL make them viable and sustainable, and allow them to serve their communities in the ways we’ve all come to expect?
Feb 6th, 2009
Kris
Charge for their content. Here is a link to a recent article from Time magazine. I would recommend you all look at it. Some very good points here:
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1877191,00.html
Pete, advertising can pay the bills. I feel that newspaper executives got distracted and decided to change up their business model. They sunk millions into setting up web Editorial and Sales departments and that is why they are in shambles. Andy Rooney had a spot on 60 minutes recently that said, you can hear the news on the Radio (or watch it on TV), but you would wake up and read it in the morning paper to find out if it was true.
They have something all of us need. I think we should pay for it.
Feb 6th, 2009
dan o
i don’t mean this in a bad way, but i use westandclear not for original content, but as an aggregate of information. the information you get isn’t exclusive – unless it’s a rumor – but rather pulled from a range of sources. without newspapers or news organizations, bloggers would be up a creek without a paddle.
Feb 9th, 2009
Steve Smith
Dan, you make a good point — W&C tries to aggregate Fort Worth specific content and filter it for those who are interested in Fort Worth whether that content is from a newspaper, a press release or social media. I’m a believer in newspapers, but to say that blogs would shrivel up and die without newspapers just isn’t true. W&C has far more sources that you believe — we talk to them and they talk to us. More newspaper stories than you’d think start out as press releases. We get those, too.
And really, no content is “exclusive” anymore. Even content we generate here appears on Pegasus News, Outside.In, Texas Blog Net News and other online syndication sources. They use some of our content and link back to us. It’s part of producing content in an interconnected media environment. When the S-T reports something first, we link back to them and give them credit. Fair enough. When the S-T learns about stories from reading a blog, they suddenly decide to pick up the phone and begin reporting as if it were all original thought. Not quite cricket in my book. But that’s the way the game is played.
Feb 9th, 2009
Reply to “S-T To Charge for Online Content?”
By posting your comment, you agree to abide by the terms of the West and Clear comment policy.