Print 40 comment(s) - last by glitchc.. on Sep 22 at 7:18 PM

Eric Schmidt says in general paid content plans don't work online

Print publications that run websites are fighting to convince their peers and readers that paying for content online is the only way to go. The problem is that a generation of internet users are used to getting content for free and getting them to pay for the content will be difficult if not impossible.

Publishing tycoon Rupert Murdoch has previously stated that his company will begin charging for access to the content on all of its websites. Currently the only publication that charges for content in Murdoch's empire is the Wall Street Journal.

Shortly after Murdoch made the decree that all of News Corps. websites would charge for access to content, Google CEO Eric Schmidt scoffed at the plan and said that newspapers don’t want to "piss off" readers. Schmidt has again scoffed at Murdoch's plan to charge for online content.

Schmidt told attendees at a meeting of a group of British broadcasting executives that it would be very hard to charge for content online because the same content is available free.

Reuters quotes Schmidt saying, "In general these models have not worked for general public consumption because there are enough free sources that the marginal value of paying is not justified based on the incremental value of quantity. So my guess is for niche and specialist markets ... it will be possible to do it but I think it is unlikely that you will be able to do it for all news."

Schmidt is basically saying that the Wall Street Journal being successful with charging for content online is the exception, not the rule.

Murdoch has still not rolled out his pay for content scheme to any of the other websites in his publishing empire; perhaps he knows deep down that wishing readers would pay and getting them to do so are two very different things.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Faux News - We Distort, You Abide.
By dark matter on 9/18/2009 2:08:21 PM , Rating: 5
I don't know why this poster is being voted down. He 100% correct.

I would like to bring to the attention of those on the right (who more than likely voted him down) that his post was in fact completely neutral. Those papers that favour the left are almost as bad. But the Murdoch empire are marginally more sensationalist.

It's all proganda and blown out of proportion. Generally the world is a boring place, and who wants to read a boring newspaper, hence the need to "spice" things up a little, on both sides of the fence.

Here in the UK, the murdoch papers are constantly in court for printing false stories. Not to mention the sensationalism that was "SWINE FLU". I thought we would all be dead by now.

And they actually expect me to PAY to read that guff. Give me a break.

RE: Faux News - We Distort, You Abide.
By jhb116 on 9/18/2009 6:04:48 PM , Rating: 3
Yes Fox News is biased right - won't dispute that fact. Left almost as bad - what? The NY Times called Bush Hitler and MSNBC is just a media outlet for left wing rhetoric. The only channel that seems to have pulled itself to a somewhat more neutral stance (but still leans left) is CNN. (The BBC and other news sources not corrupted by US bipartisan politics aside.)

Reality is that paying for what is being broadcast today - sensationalism for the sake of viewership and whatever point of view they support - will likely fail. Real investigative journalism that presents facts and tries to pull in all the pro's and cons and leaves it to the individual viewer/reader to form their own opinion - may have a chance at being able to charge for access.

RE: Faux News - We Distort, You Abide.
By Reclaimer77 on 9/20/2009 12:35:45 PM , Rating: 3
OH and I think Fox News was also the only network that actually covered the march on Washington last week with any seriousness, while the other left wing rags are trying to pretend it didn't happen. But I guess like a million citizens protesting against it's government isn't really news, nope, just more right wing bias...

Get a clue guys.

RE: Faux News - We Distort, You Abide.
By JoshuaBuss on 9/21/2009 9:18:55 AM , Rating: 2

I hope you're trying to be funny..there were around 75,000 people.. not 'millions'. if you're being serious, your post is hilarious for being so pathetically wrong.. but if you're being a sly and sneaky comic, you've earned my respect.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/21/2009 9:55:24 AM , Rating: 2
No it was just poorly written. Millions of Americans ARE actively protesting the government. I didn't mean it to come as meaning they were all there at the event however. My bad.

"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki