Posted by John Burke on September 15, 2005 at 4:33 PM
The New York Times, who's May announcement of an upcoming subscription service faded over the summer, is poised to start charging for some content as of September 19. This week, the Times began posting explanations on its own website detailing the package, dubbed TimesSelect, and offering twenty percent off the $50 price tag to those who sign-up before the launch date. Subscribers will have access to the Times respected op-ed columnists, 12 feature writers from the Business, NewYork/Region and Sports sections as well as two additional columnists from The International Herald Tribune and access to 100 archived articles per month. The package also includes early access to articles in the Sunday Times, personalized email alerts and a tool that allows readers to organize articles from all over the Web for future consultation.
Reactions to the service have been mixed. Some feel that online subscription experiments are necessary for papers looking to earn more revenue from the Web. Others, especially proponents of free online content and bloggers who regularly comment on the Times' op-eds, have criticized the move and feel that the paper's online traffic will decrease considerably. Only time will tell, but the failure or success of TimesSelect could determine the failure or success of online newspaper subscriptions.
Source: New York Times
Posted by John Burke on September 15, 2005 at 4:33 PM
The New York Times, who's May announcement of an upcoming subscription service faded over the summer, is poised to start charging for some content as of September 19. This week, the Times began posting explanations on its own website detailing the package, dubbed TimesSelect, and offering twenty percent off the $50 price tag to those who sign-up before the launch date. Subscribers will have access to the Times respected op-ed columnists, 12 feature writers from the Business, NewYork/Region and Sports sections as well as two additional columnists from The International Herald Tribune and access to 100 archived articles per month. The package also includes early access to articles in the Sunday Times, personalized email alerts and a tool that allows readers to organize articles from all over the Web for future consultation.
Reactions to the service have been mixed. Some feel that online subscription experiments are necessary for papers looking to earn more revenue from the Web. Others, especially proponents of free online content and bloggers who regularly comment on the Times' op-eds, have criticized the move and feel that the paper's online traffic will decrease considerably. Only time will tell, but the failure or success of TimesSelect could determine the failure or success of online newspaper subscriptions.
Source: New York Times
Posted by John Burke on September 15, 2005 at 4:33 PM
The New York Times, who's May announcement of an upcoming subscription service faded over the summer, is poised to start charging for some content as of September 19. This week, the Times began posting explanations on its own website detailing the package, dubbed TimesSelect, and offering twenty percent off the $50 price tag to those who sign-up before the launch date. Subscribers will have access to the Times respected op-ed columnists, 12 feature writers from the Business, NewYork/Region and Sports sections as well as two additional columnists from The International Herald Tribune and access to 100 archived articles per month. The package also includes early access to articles in the Sunday Times, personalized email alerts and a tool that allows readers to organize articles from all over the Web for future consultation.
Reactions to the service have been mixed. Some feel that online subscription experiments are necessary for papers looking to earn more revenue from the Web. Others, especially proponents of free online content and bloggers who regularly comment on the Times' op-eds, have criticized the move and feel that the paper's online traffic will decrease considerably. Only time will tell, but the failure or success of TimesSelect could determine the failure or success of online newspaper subscriptions.
Source: New York Times
Press Gazette reports that, like The Guardian which will change format in the following weeks (see previous posting), The Telegraph might change to the Berliner format as well. Press Gazette
cites Jeremy Deedes, executive vice chairman of the Telegraph Group : "Maybe that's the way forward for The Telegraph — maintaining the essence of a serious newspaper with a convenience in size for people who don't read their newspapers at the kitchen table."
Source: Press Gazette
Since the end of June Scotsman.com is conducting a new strategy regarding its content. A part of the articles are restricted to readers who pay for a subscription. This 'premium content', which forms about 10 % of the site, consists of opinion, comment & analysis, obituaries, games like crosswords and professional pages dealing with law, education, medical matters and so on. An introductory offer is available for £29.95 per year. The strategy completes other financial sources like online advertising and a digital archive.
The move seems to be against the trend for free content in online news media. But Alistair Brown, general manager at Scotsman.com points out at journalism.co.uk that it depends on for which content you are charging: "You don't charge for what's popular - you charge for what is unique. Readers want insight and a Scottish perspective on the world - and that's what our columnists have got." An important detail is that key areas of the site remain free, as the site is benefitting from abrupt rises in traffic when big stories are picked up by other news websites. He was also encouraged by the fact that the New York Times is introducing a similar model in September (see former posting).
Sources: journalism.co.uk, scotsman.com
Since the end of June Scotsman.com is conducting a new strategy regarding its content. A part of the articles are restricted to readers who pay for a subscription. This 'premium content', which forms about 10 % of the site, consists of opinion, comment & analysis, obituaries, games like crosswords and professional pages dealing with law, education, medical matters and so on. An introductory offer is available for £29.95 per year. The strategy completes other financial sources like online advertising and a digital archive.
The move seems to be against the trend for free content in online news media. But Alistair Brown, general manager at Scotsman.com points out at journalism.co.uk that it depends on for which content you are charging: "You don't charge for what's popular - you charge for what is unique. Readers want insight and a Scottish perspective on the world - and that's what our columnists have got." An important detail is that key areas of the site remain free, as the site is benefitting from abrupt rises in traffic when big stories are picked up by other news websites. He was also encouraged by the fact that the New York Times is introducing a similar model in September (see former posting).
Sources: journalism.co.uk, scotsman.com
Since the end of June Scotsman.com is conducting a new strategy regarding its content. A part of the articles are restricted to readers who pay for a subscription. This 'premium content', which forms about 10 % of the site, consists of opinion, comment & analysis, obituaries, games like crosswords and professional pages dealing with law, education, medical matters and so on. An introductory offer is available for £29.95 per year. The strategy completes other financial sources like online advertising and a digital archive.
The move seems to be against the trend for free content in online news media. But Alistair Brown, general manager at Scotsman.com points out at journalism.co.uk that it depends on for which content you are charging: "You don't charge for what's popular - you charge for what is unique. Readers want insight and a Scottish perspective on the world - and that's what our columnists have got." An important detail is that key areas of the site remain free, as the site is benefitting from abrupt rises in traffic when big stories are picked up by other news websites. He was also encouraged by the fact that the New York Times is introducing a similar model in September (see former posting).
Sources: journalism.co.uk, scotsman.com
To facilitate following the "wikitorial" issue, here are the links to our postings that include links to the articles necessary to understand where this innovation may be taking newspapers:
Beginning of the debate here, here,
anticipation of the experiment here and here
after the fall here, here and here
To facilitate following the "wikitorial" issue, here are the links to our postings that include links to the articles necessary to understand where this innovation may be taking newspapers:
Beginning of the debate here, here,
anticipation of the experiment here and here
after the fall here, here and here
To facilitate following the "wikitorial" issue, here are the links to our postings that include links to the articles necessary to understand where this innovation may be taking newspapers:
Beginning of the debate here, here,
anticipation of the experiment here and here
after the fall here, here and here
Steve Outing at Poynter has written an informative piece for editors and publishers confused about the citizen journalism buzz and how to go about using it for the benefit of their publications. Noting that many are skeptical about the emerging phenomenon, Outing eases fears with an explanation of what he calls "The 11 Layers of Citizen Journalism." Beginning with the basics, Outing explains that many papers are initially hesitant to even open up their columns to reader comments, "an imperative characteristic of citizen journalism." This being the first step to getting accustomed to having non-professional material published on their pages, editors should slowly work towards recruiting readers to add content to professional columnists' content. Readers with certain specialties or experiences will add value to a reporter's article of a similar topic. A few steps down the line, editors should open up their newsrooms to their public, making their news process transparent, regaining trust among readers. Eventually a purely citizen journalism site should be launched, the next logical step being a mixed professional/citizen journalism publication, be it online or print. An example of this model would be Korea's OhmyNews. Finally, Outing invokes the "wiki" model the Los Angeles Times is about to test (see previous posting) with its editorial page. The Wiki model allows anyone to post an article online which anyone else can edit, theoretically ending in an unbiased and well-informed "collective intelligence" article. Although Outing advocates this model, he also warns that, "Going this far with citizen journalism will take some guts -- and a change in thinking. It means moving far down the continuum of journalist-reader interaction, allowing an unprecedented loss of control of the editorial product."
Source: Poynter
Steve Outing at Poynter has written an informative piece for editors and publishers confused about the citizen journalism buzz and how to go about using it for the benefit of their publications. Noting that many are skeptical about the emerging phenomenon, Outing eases fears with an explanation of what he calls "The 11 Layers of Citizen Journalism." Beginning with the basics, Outing explains that many papers are initially hesitant to even open up their columns to reader comments, "an imperative characteristic of citizen journalism." This being the first step to getting accustomed to having non-professional material published on their pages, editors should slowly work towards recruiting readers to add content to professional columnists' content. Readers with certain specialties or experiences will add value to a reporter's article of a similar topic. A few steps down the line, editors should open up their newsrooms to their public, making their news process transparent, regaining trust among readers. Eventually a purely citizen journalism site should be launched, the next logical step being a mixed professional/citizen journalism publication, be it online or print. An example of this model would be Korea's OhmyNews. Finally, Outing invokes the "wiki" model the Los Angeles Times is about to test (see previous posting) with its editorial page. The Wiki model allows anyone to post an article online which anyone else can edit, theoretically ending in an unbiased and well-informed "collective intelligence" article. Although Outing advocates this model, he also warns that, "Going this far with citizen journalism will take some guts -- and a change in thinking. It means moving far down the continuum of journalist-reader interaction, allowing an unprecedented loss of control of the editorial product."
Source: Poynter
Steve Outing at Poynter has written an informative piece for editors and publishers confused about the citizen journalism buzz and how to go about using it for the benefit of their publications. Noting that many are skeptical about the emerging phenomenon, Outing eases fears with an explanation of what he calls "The 11 Layers of Citizen Journalism." Beginning with the basics, Outing explains that many papers are initially hesitant to even open up their columns to reader comments, "an imperative characteristic of citizen journalism." This being the first step to getting accustomed to having non-professional material published on their pages, editors should slowly work towards recruiting readers to add content to professional columnists' content. Readers with certain specialties or experiences will add value to a reporter's article of a similar topic. A few steps down the line, editors should open up their newsrooms to their public, making their news process transparent, regaining trust among readers. Eventually a purely citizen journalism site should be launched, the next logical step being a mixed professional/citizen journalism publication, be it online or print. An example of this model would be Korea's OhmyNews. Finally, Outing invokes the "wiki" model the Los Angeles Times is about to test (see previous posting) with its editorial page. The Wiki model allows anyone to post an article online which anyone else can edit, theoretically ending in an unbiased and well-informed "collective intelligence" article. Although Outing advocates this model, he also warns that, "Going this far with citizen journalism will take some guts -- and a change in thinking. It means moving far down the continuum of journalist-reader interaction, allowing an unprecedented loss of control of the editorial product."
Source: Poynter
Senior Vice-President of Digital Operations at the New York Times, Martin Nisenholtz, held a question and answer session yesterday (found on PaidContent with audio feed and AdAge) concerning the NYT's decision to put a paywall up on some premium content come September (previous posting). Predictably, he received a lot of criticism, but he defended the move saying the Times needed a second revenue stream. Current USD 2.95 access to an archived article brings in over USD 1 million a year, a number which Nisenholtz hopes will increase significantly with the new subscription package, TimesSelect. The NYT's SVP did acknowledge the possibility that placing the papers' op-ed columnists behind the paywall could inhibit the online conversation of the blogosphere which frequently uses the op-ed staff as a starting point for discussion. But he said, "Feedback from columnists has been good--[they acknowledge] that we need to create an additional revenue stream."
Speaking of other experiments, Nisenholtz said NYT's RSS is growing and that homepage access to the site will drop to 60% as feeds become more popular. He also claimed that TimesSelect is the only pay model the Times is considering.
Sources: PaidContent, AdAge
Senior Vice-President of Digital Operations at the New York Times, Martin Nisenholtz, held a question and answer session yesterday (found on PaidContent with audio feed and AdAge) concerning the NYT's decision to put a paywall up on some premium content come September (previous posting). Predictably, he received a lot of criticism, but he defended the move saying the Times needed a second revenue stream. Current USD 2.95 access to an archived article brings in over USD 1 million a year, a number which Nisenholtz hopes will increase significantly with the new subscription package, TimesSelect. The NYT's SVP did acknowledge the possibility that placing the papers' op-ed columnists behind the paywall could inhibit the online conversation of the blogosphere which frequently uses the op-ed staff as a starting point for discussion. But he said, "Feedback from columnists has been good--[they acknowledge] that we need to create an additional revenue stream."
Speaking of other experiments, Nisenholtz said NYT's RSS is growing and that homepage access to the site will drop to 60% as feeds become more popular. He also claimed that TimesSelect is the only pay model the Times is considering.
Sources: PaidContent, AdAge
