Posts Tagged ‘Rupert Murdoch’

The Future of Paywalls for Online News

Journalism, Media | Posted by Larry Greenberg
Nov 09 2009

What’s a national newsprint magazine to do in an era of declining ad revenues?  Add many more pages and stories, and use more expensive paper stock, of course.

If that seems to contradict the prevailing industry wisdom about the future of news publishing, Bloomberg LP may know something others don’t.

MediaWeek reported recently that Bloomberg executives unveiled their plans for BusinessWeek at an internal staff meeting.  In addition to a bigger, glossier magazine, Bloomberg will make most of BusinessWeek’s general coverage available online for free.    Bloomberg is, however, considering a $100 annual online subscription fee for those wanting access to an extensive library of vertical-specific content.  Further, the Wall Street Journal wrote, Bloomberg is considering charging subscribers as much as $1,000 per year for access to certain content on Bloomberg.com.

This latest development suggests the publishing industry has cast another vote for the freemium model.

Although not a consumer publication in the mold of a general news weekly, BusinessWeek nevertheless appeals to a much broader readership than Bloomberg and other hard core business information services.  Will the industry see more mergers between B2B and consumer media outlets?  Will such arrangements involve B2B outlets, with their relatively lucrative corporate-paid subscriptions, supporting the ad-dependent consumer partner that, in turn, brings more readers and its print brand prestige to the table?

Getting consumers to pay for online content — either as subscribers or per article — is going to be a tougher sale.  Rupert Murdoch has indicated the News Corporation may delay plans to charge for the New York Post, the Australian and, in the UK, the Sun and the Times.  There seem simply to be too many competitors willing to give away similar online content.

The New York Times ran an article about how subscriptions remain the holy grail of revenue generation.    The piece noted that unlike a pay-per-use model, in which the consumer must make repeated value judgments, the traditional subscription model spares customers the bother of repeated decision-making and ensures a steady stream of revenues.   Most people, however, are already accustomed to free online content. Further, when a tough economy is pressuring individuals to reduce discretionary spending,  the task of getting consumers on  board appears even more daunting.

It seems online subscriptions would more likely succeed with business customers, because people are more willing to pay for the news they need, not want.

Desperation is the Mother of Invention: Papers Trying New Revenue Models

Free Content, Internet, Journalism, Media, Newspapers, Paid Content | Posted by Larry Greenberg
Jul 20 2009

You’ve heard the cliché: ‘necessity is the mother of invention.’  When it comes to the newspaper business, one might also substitute ‘desperation’ for necessity.

In Chris Anderson’ new book, Free: A Future of a Radical Price,  the Wired Editor-in-Chief talks about the psychological barrier that free represents for consumers.  Once the ‘free’ line is crossed, at least when it involves digital content, it’s very hard to convert consumers of free into paying customers.  While representing an existential threat to the traditional media model, Anderson also relates how free could drive media companies to innovate. Such innovation might entail the creation of new profit-making models based on free, as well as alternate sources of funding that match supply and demand with long-tail precision.

Needless to say, many publishers are not giving up on paid content, at least not yet.

News Corporation’s The Wall Street Journal (subscription) and the Financial Times (freemium) are two examples of publishers who already charge for online access. Not surprisingly, News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch and Financial Times editor Lionel Barber predict that most papers will go from digital free to digital fee in the not-so-distant future.

It’s important to note, however, that The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times both serve a business audience that places a great value on the timely delivery of financial and market data (not to mention it’s covered as a business expense).  What about publications catering to a general interest readership, such as The New York Times?

The New York Times, which has already switched from paid to free, seems less sure about its plans. After having discarded its online pay plan in 2008, The Times recently floated a trial balloon to gauge how readers would feel about paying a $5 monthly online access fee, with a discount for print subscribers. (Considering that an annual subscription is around $600, offering print subscribers an online discount might seem more like an insult than a deal.)

Uncertain about the prospects of a paid model, The Times is also exploring other options.  Craig Whitney, an assistant managing editor at The Times, recently told Poynter’s Bill Mitchell that the paper was weighing the possibility of seeking funding from foundations, a la National Public Radio.

Mitchell’s piece also alluded to a pending collaboration between The Times and freelancer Lindsey Hoshaw, who is using Spot.Us, a crowd-funding start-up, to raise $10,000 in expense money to write about a massive garbage blob –  twice the size of Texas – that’s currently floating in the North Pacific. Given the concept’s newness, the paper finds itself deliberating both the financial and ethical considerations of such an arrangement.

Finally, Journalism Online is presenting itself as a potential savior of paid online content. According to Daily Finance, the Journalism Online’s partners – author and media entrepreneur Steve Brill, former Wall Street Journal publisher L. Gordon Crovitz and telecom executive Leo Hindery Jr.  – will soon announce the names of popular newspaper and magazine brands that will be selling their content via Journalism Online using a variety of bundled pay schemes.

A year from now we may have a lot clearer picture as to how all of these initiatives have faired, how inevitable free – at least when it comes to digital media – really is.

MySpace and Facebook: The Ups and Downs of Social Media Companies

Branding, Internet, Social Media | Posted by Larry Greenberg
Jun 12 2009

In 2005, Rupert Murdoch was regarded as a genius for scooping up MySpace for $580 million, besting media rival Sumner Redstone in the process.  Murdoch is now being second-guessed. This week the social media giant announced plans to cut about 420 employees – about 30% – of its U.S. staff and 450 employees – about two-thirds – of its international force.  There is speculation about the possibility that Redstone can now step in and purchase MySpace at what is now considered a relative bargain for the site — $1 billion.

According to eMarketer, in May 2009 Facebook topped MySpace as the most popular social networking site in the United States. And although as of April 2009 MySpace still led with almost 47 percent of the social networking advertising space, a Crain’s article refers to an eMarketer prediction that MySpace’s ad revenue will decline 15% this year to $495 million, while Facebook will see a 10% ad revenue increase to $230 million.

So for the moment, anyway, Facebook has overtaken MySpace as social media’s BMOC. Who will claim that title four years from now? Twitter? Or a yet-to-be identified company now incubating in some Silicon Valley garage or Silicon Alley loft? Or MySpace, once again?

Popular tastes can be fickle, after all, so how can a brand or company achieve a relatively permanent dominance in the social media space?

San Jose Mercury News’ Scott Duke Harris wrote an excellent piece last week discussing Facebook’s future, Planet Facebook: Is social networking site a phenomenon or fad?” He cites the company’s purported vision to make the terms “social connecting” and “Facebook” synonyms, just as Google became the verb for search.  More than 10,000 websites are now compatible with Facebook Connect, he notes, an easy way to sign on and provide chat feeds, videos, photos and other items to participating web sites.  The Twitter-Facebook connection is a fine example of the benefits that such interactivity adds to the online experience.

In addition to interactivity and ease-of-use, communications platforms rely on the network effect; the more users in the network, the more value that is provided to each customer in that network.  Verizon Wireless and countless other mobile phone companies hammer this point through their advertising.

But phone companies are able to lock consumers into costly contracts because they control the means of distribution; social networking brands don’t.  People can join, quit or ignore MySpace and Facebook at will.  Survival also depends not necessarily on the number of users, but the quality and value of those users to each other – something that LinkedIn does reasonably well for business professionals.

As MySpace restructures and, possibly, rebrands, perhaps it will focus its energies on what it already does best: being one of the best independently-produced music, film and comedy destinations on the web.

It’s tough being all things to all people.