New York Times looking at two paid content options, asking print subscribers, will decide by August?

Posted by Emma Heald on July 10, 2009 at 3:08 PM

The New York Times is to decide how to charge for its website by August, the Telegraph reported following an interview with Scott Heekin-Canedy, the president and general manager of the New York Times Media Group. Meanwhile, Paid Content and Poynter are reporting that the NYT is in the process of asking its subscribers how much they would be prepared to pay for online content.

The details Heekin-Canedy told the Telegraph about the charging options that NYT is looking at echoes those reported by the New York Observer in May: the paper is considering either a metre system, similar to that operated by the Financial Times, or a membership model, which would include a collection of services and privileges. Heekin-Canedy elaborated on the latter, suggested that members might get special access to discussions with at journalist, or special offers for hotels or restaurants.

The survey of subscribers seems to be aimed at researching the membership option, if not another option entirely. In the survey that started via email on Thursday, the NYT offers multiple scenarios, according to Paid Content and Poynter, including one at $5 a month for unlimited access and a discounted one at $2.50 a month for print subscribers. As a comparison, a print subscription outside the New York metro area for a year would currently cost $770 ($681 for new subscribers) or $608 within ($538 for new subscribers.)

NYT Co spokeswoman Catherine Mathis told Paid Content by email that "The purpose of the survey is really to reach out to our home-delivery subscribers and understand how they would react to a pay model for the website." Paid Content writer Staci Kramer points out, however, that a problem with the survey is that those people who are willing to pay for print are the ones most likely to pay online. The survey asks subscribers if a fee for online access would affect their print subscriptions.

The survey also seeks to measure attitudes to these assertions: (via Poynter)
- I think it is wrong for The New York Times to charge anyone for access to nytimes.com.
- I would pay for access to nytimes.com because it offers more than The New York Times print newspaper.
- I think that as long as subscribers get a discount, charging them for access to nytimes.com is fair.
- I would pay for access to nytimes.com because it offers valuable content and features I can't get anywhere else.
- I would gladly pay for access to nytimes.com in order to support the Times' quality journalism.

(respondents have a range of choices from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree")

Somewhat in contradiction to Heekin-Canedy's statement to the Telegraph, Mathis told Poynter that the paper does not have any timetable for making a decision about charging online. What is clear is that the paper has been and will continue to consider its options very carefully, following the failed TimesSelect experiment which was ended in 2007. Charging print subscribers extra to go online when they are already paying $600 or $700 for the paper possibly seems excessive: presumably the results of the survey will make it clear if subscribers this is the case. Either way, enthusiasm for charging for online content is growing and it seems likely that by the end of this year some general interest papers will be offering a selection of paid online content.

Source: Telegraph, Paid Content, Poynter