Alan Mutter, the ‘dean’, of analysing the newspaper biz fires up the controversy machine with a blog post called “Why media must charge for its content.”
It’s a longun and I haven’t read it yet. However, I anticipate it will start a long string of blogs debating the fineries of his points. I’ve already advocated for news businesses charging for their content in the past. It’s not for every company, though. Could the Rocky Mountain News exist as a paid web product? I’m guessing not. At least not with a staff of more than 30. Could the New York Times charge for its product? Probably. If not them, then who exactly?
The problem with the web is that it is hyper competitive and has a tendency to cut all prices to zero. If a bunch of newspapers want to move in a coordinated manner and start charging for their content, then great, we’ll all have to pay for news. But if 30 papers start trying to charge and 10 don’t, then those ten will likely get bigger pageviews. They can blog the news that’s behind the paywall and they can also report original pieces. They’ll get bigger viewers, more advertisers and probably make more money. But, maybe not. I really don’t know.
It just looks like we’re in an untenable situation that can’t hold with or without paywalls.