backtop


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

the measure of unbiased journalism
By chromal on 9/21/2009 4:04:21 PM , Rating: 2
Is when you can watch the news article and the thoughts being journalistically explored on the topic and not find yourself screaming the blatent biases and omissions back at the television set by the end. Fox has always flunked this smell test. CNN et al do poorly as well, but for them, I feel as though it's more a spirit of neglect, rather than the malicious manipulation Fox seems to try and pull.

Though it's not journalism, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart does a reasonable job of dragging fox through their own offal from time to time, for example, Fox's coverage of demonstrations in D.C. during the Bush regime, vs their coverage of a conservative coalition demonstration a week or so ago. Again, their hypocracy was nicely summed up by the Mon, Sep 14th, edition of The Daily Show (article covering Fox's coverage of the recent D.C. demonstration starts about 10 minutes into the program). Here's a URL, use it while it's valid:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/95615/the-daily-show-wit...




"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki