news-record.com

BLOGS

The Editor's Log

A modest proposal: a different kind of Web site

As more and more discussions among newspaper publishers center on making newspaper content accessible only to paying customers, I've been particularly interested in this idea put forth most recently by Scott Rosenberg.

Instead of starting with the journalism and then out how to support it, start with the plan for revenue, then figure out what journalism might complement it. Recognize that the realm where innovation is most needed is the business side and how it relates to the journalism.... Begin dreaming up, and testing out, approaches that provide a more organic connection between the reporting we need and the income that supports it.

(Link to his inspiration here.)

What if we put all of our newspaper content behind a wall accessible to subscribers or paying customers and created an entirely different kind of community news Web site? What would that new Web site look like?

If you consider that the stories from the newspaper are rarely in the top 10 most viewed stories on the Web site, there may not be a significant loss to those who read us on the Web. Newspaper stories are written to be read in a newspaper; the Web is a different animal and people use it drastically different than they use a paper. So why shouldn't a newspaper have a separate site for those who want to read the paper online and those who want something different. whether it is video and sound, links and/or interactivity?

Let me say right here that we have no immediate plans to create such a multi-headed animal. And I'm not trying to enter the pay vs. free debate. But watching the industry discuss models, it occurs to me that we could do precisely as Rosenberg suggests: Start with the revenue and build the journalism to complement it. Before anyone wails that there are ethical problems or that the idea is a sellout, I think those issues can be addressed and removed.

So, I'm asking you, the users, for help imagineering what you'd want to see on such a site. Does it still include breaking news alerts? Should it include a community aggregator section? Presumably it would have video, but of what? The blogs get a lot of traffic -- keep 'em? Increase them? If so, what topics? Do we voice more opinion and get into more gossipy sort of community-based content? And what do you think about where the revenue comes from? Is it from the users or advertisers or both? (Just for informational purposes, breaking news, crime stories, food stories and the generally odd-ball stories are the most highly trafficked.?)

Again, it's not on the table here, except that it is worth thinking about. Help me think about it.

Update: A wonderful list of possibilities from New Business Models for News. (via Steve Buttry)

Permalink
Tags: Digital future

Posted by John Robinson on Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 1:01 pm

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

jeffharbert

August 20, 2009 - 3:52 pm EDT

John,

I've been thinking lately about this very thing. Journalism and physical newspapers have always been transitory. A journalist would write an article, it would get published, the paper would get read by the public, and the next day the cycle repeated.

Newspaper companies still operate under this transitory model. Why not take advantage of the easy permanence the internet offers while capitalizing on offering convenience to consumers? Compile articles and columns written about a particular subject into books (POD, maybe?) and offer them for sale. Partner with local colleges and professors to put textbooks together. As rife as this area is with history, I can also see collaborating with area schools on new local history classes. The textbooks would be written by N&R journalists and editors.

Great topic, btw.

Jeff Harbert

Doug Johnson

August 20, 2009 - 4:51 pm EDT

I would have no problem paying a reasonable rate for reading your paper on line.
It may even cheaper than going to the store and buying it.
I hate videos! I prefer reading.
I can turn on the TV if, I want to watch.

tpartrick

August 20, 2009 - 8:57 pm EDT

One advantage the web has is that it can provide access to archives. How hard would it be to have stories easily linked to previous stories?

I read the newspapers, but I never go to a newspaper to see how a story has unfolded. I have to go to the internet and hope to find the background to a current story. If I read something that piqued my interest, I could go to the website and dig deeper. If the N-R used links referring to its own archived stories, it would add value to the day's news stories.

An example would be today's story about the young man killed by a tazer. The online article has no links to tazers, the sheriff, the jail or deaths in jails. I'm sure the NR has a lot of material in its archives on all of these items.

John Robinson

August 21, 2009 - 8:44 am EDT

Thanks, folks. Keep the ideas coming.

Natallini

August 21, 2009 - 9:21 am EDT

Ideally, your new site should be web 2.0- all about the user and what he or she wants to see- they should be able to customize their news page; similar to Netvibes or Google. User name and login needs to be user friendly. Tapping into the Twitter API would be great for folks like me that like a seamless media experience. Archives, tag clouding, content tagging are also a given.

scharrison

August 21, 2009 - 11:34 am EDT

Okay, I'm going to set aside my aversion to paying for Internet content for a moment, but that actually does play a role in part of what I'm about to say.

As with any (new) business venture or proposed subsidiary of an already existing one, the model you're looking at needs to be able to stand on its own and stay in the black. Before you say, "Duh, Steve", keep in mind that much of the content for this hypothetical site is going to be a reproduction of what appears in the print version. As an N&R staffer told me in another diary here, when you guys pay for content from AP etal, you're also paying for the digital version as well, so you don't have to pay extra to put it online. So, if the paper paper goes away, the revenue from the pay site should still be enough to cover syndicated content, as well as all the other costs associated with the gathering and editing of all content the site offers. That's not as clearly stated as I thought it would be, but nobody's paying me for this, so...

Back to my aversion to paying for stuff. Since a big chunk (how much?) of the paper's revenue comes from advertising, and those advertisers will not pay the big bucks unless their message flashes across the eyes of a lot of readers, you would need to have a plan to attract boodles of subscribers. You might find several hundred readers that would pay good money to read the paper online, but is that enough to attract the big advertising money? I doubt it. So, in order to bring in more readers, the subscription fee should be (much?) smaller than the print version, plus you would need a ton of stuff that people couldn't find (for free) anywhere else on the Internet. And even then, I doubt you could attract enough subscribers to attract the ad money. Sure, you'll get some, plus the Google ads and other Internettish things, but that ain't keeping the lights on, if you know what I mean.

Here's the thing about "new sources of revenue": if they can't stand on their own, they can (soon) become a revenue drain. You gotta do the whole nine yards; solid business plan, financing, ROI, market share, future growth potential, etc., etc. If it won't work on paper, you can't wish it into the black later.

Illiterati

August 21, 2009 - 1:24 pm EDT

All great ideas up there. Add me as an online-only reader who'd be willing to pay a small annual fee for full access. Including an easy-to-search archive in that sub rate would be a great incentive, much like the NYT does with its archive access.

One point regarding user experience is the N&R's increasing use of scrolling ads in the sidebars. Whatever changed in your sidebar (the "Featured Ads" scroll, I think) this week cranks up the fan on my laptop within a minute or two. Please, I beg you to stop using this scrolling ad feature. AdBlockPlus can't even seem to make it stop. Ugh! Autoscrolling ads and autoloading video are surefire ways to make people leave your site quickly.

pixelpusher

August 24, 2009 - 3:58 pm EDT

Hmmm...

This is the kind of dialogue newspaper folks should have had in 1999, not 2009.

My, what a difference ten years makes.

John Robinson

August 24, 2009 - 4:37 pm EDT

This kind of dialogue was had in 1999. The drivers are much different now.

tim tribbett

August 25, 2009 - 8:25 pm EDT

I would have no objection to making web content available to subscribers only if that's what it takes to keep papers afloat.As to what I want to see on the site the content is fine now(just don't EVER take away the jokes on you blog )