Not Comics: About Paying For It

This Special Report on charging for material on-line that's up at Editor & Publisher is pretty fascinating in terms of a snapshot of current thoughts on how newspapers might monetize certain aspects of web publishing. That said, I'm not exactly sure what to make of it. There are obvious things in there like the fact that you can actually charge more for advertising to a select audience than to a general one that are presented in a way that makes me doubt the seriousness of the article. As a survey, though, it seems effectively broad and discriminatory, and points out a lot of programs that seem worth noting.

Two things I'd like to see addressed as this debate develops. First, I'm always dubious that you can take as much away as people would like to from programs that run counter to conventional wisdom, because I think such programs have a uniqueness that are a specific benefit and may or may not translate to a new standard model. Second, I'm always unclear as to the standards we should use to judge such things. I mean, it's clear that some pay-models can work. For instance, if a South Bend newspaper were to put together a $15/year package to get an unbelievably informative on-line magazine about Notre Dame football, I could see that working: I'd buy it as a gift. I still don't know how well something like that has to work to be a serious contributor to the bottom line, or how that model might be different in order to be transferable. As is the case with webcomics boosterism, I think a sober appraisal of what's out there and what's working right now is as relevant as projecting isolated models into a bright, shiny future.
 
posted 8:10 am PST | Permalink
 

---

 
Daily Blog Archives
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
 
Full Archives