Can paid content save newspapers? For many newspapers, there is good reason to be skeptical.
But trying to get readers to pay for content is a necessary move and naturally, major dailies like The New York Times are having an easier go of it.
The past decade has been tough for newspapers, but many newspaper execs are arguably more upbeat about the future than one might expect.
There may be a need for that optimism, but it might also be completely unfounded if new figures about newspaper revenue in 2011 are any indication.
Many newspapers are struggling to survive, and you can understand that they would want to maximise online ad revenues, but I think some run the risk of losing users through ad overkill.
Some news websites, and this in common on regional sites especially, are using some very annoying and intrusive ad formats which could be doing more harm than good.
I'm not saying they shouldn't use advertising, but newspapers have to find a balance between reader engagement and maximising ad revenues.
The New York Times is giving pay wall skeptics reason to reconsider their skepticism. Despite questions about the company's paywall strategy, the daily has managed to lure some 325,000 paying subscribers.
That's good news for a newspaper that some believed might not survive.
In the battle for the future of the tablet market, Amazon - with the Kindle Fire, may be a top contender for the lead row. But another retailer, Barnes & Noble (B&N), isn't ceding anything to its etail rival.
Yesterday, it announced that customers who pony up $120 for a one-year subscription to the digital version of PEOPLE Magazine will receive a $50 discount on the NOOK Tablet, bringing its price down to that of the Kindle Fire ($199). Customers who purchase a $240 annual subscription to the New York Times (NYT) can have a NOOK Simple Touch for free, or a NOOK Color tablet for $99.
Web writing, while basically an extension of its offline counterpart, will always be driven by visits, which will always be driven by SEO.
And as SEO becomes more about a user’s overall experience on a website than the number of keywords in the content, it’s clear that a well-ranked website can’t survive without a happy mix of the two.
The constant announcements about the death of print media may be premature, but there is little doubt that traditional print media companies have been some of the hardest hit in the past decade as digital media has taken much of the spotlight.
And the hits keep coming: eMarketer says adults in the United States are now spending more time using their mobile devices than they are consuming print media.
Facebook may be one of the most successful companies to emerge on the
consumer internet in the past decade, but it has made more than its fair
share of blunders and is no stranger to controversy and criticism,
especially when it comes to privacy.
The latest feature to attract negative attention is the company's seamless sharing, which was announced earlier this year at Facebook's F8 developer conference.
Last month we were contacted by the Newspaper Licensing Agency, which is owned by the UK’s national newspapers. It wanted to sell us a ‘newspaper copyright licence’. The licence would ensure that we become “copyright protected”.
Apparently we need a licence if we share press cuttings internally. It also applies to links shared that include “text extracts to explain what the link is”.
A licence is also required for photocopying newspaper content, scanning and email cuttings, printing from a newspaper’s website, cutting and emailing text from a newspaper website, and putting any cuttings on our website.
Much of this doesn’t apply to our organisation, but we want to make sure that we’re operating in an ethical manner and are keen to abide by the rules.
The issue is that the rules are:
b) self-defeating, and...
c) being set by people who aren’t really in any position to set them.
Let me explain.
Earlier this year, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. announced that it was making a significant bet on tablet devices.
The bet: that an iPad-only news publication could launch and thrive at a time when many established news publications were struggling to survive.
"New times demand new journalism," Murdoch proclaimed. And with eight figures in investment in The Daily, he stated confidently, "we believe The Daily will be the model for how stories are told and consumed in this digital age".
Half a year later, however, The Daily appears to be off to a slower start than Murdoch may have anticipated.