Times-Union to study charging for its online content?

[thelakelander]

If this happens, it will be an interesting experiment.  The goal is that potential online profit would make up for the continued decline of print.  The biz journal has been doing this for a while now (the linked article is an example).  I wonder how successful this strategy will be in a world where technology, citizen journalism, and free access to information advances every second?

JACKSONVILLE â€" The parent company of The Florida Times-Union    will consider charging online readers for content and other digital services now available for free.
The move is part of Morris Publishing Group’s companywide print and digital all-access subscription strategy that will be developed this year by its newly formed internal consumer pricing task force. Morris Publishing Executive Vice President Derek May said the task force will consider multiple digital elements that will include not only an online pay wall, but also strategies for tablets, mobile devices and other digital products.

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/print-edition/2012/01/13/times-union-to-study-charging-for-its.html

[thelakelander]

It would potentially work like this:

A pay wall would include the first 15 to 20 views of certain content for free and pricing that ranges from $1 to $2.99 per month for subscribers and $3 to $6.95 per month for nonsubscribers.

The Chicago Sun-Times and its affiliates just implemented a similar system last month:

CHICAGO (AP) â€" The Chicago Sun-Times will start charging all visitors to its websites, the newspaper said Tuesday.
Starting Thursday, readers will get 20 free page views every 30 days at any site in the Sun-Times Media Group, which includes the Sun-Times and other papers in the suburbs, the newspaper said (http://bit.ly/tz6s4k). After 20 views, readers will be required to subscribe.
Print subscribers will be offered a rate of $1.99 every four weeks. Online-only subscribers will pay $6.99 every four weeks, or about $78 annually.

The Sun-Times and other print media have struggled with an economic downturn and a migration of advertisers from print to the Web. Both the Sun-Times and Chicago's other major newspaper, the Chicago Tribune, have been through bankruptcy proceedings in recent years, slashing staffs and making other cutbacks.

"We think the time is long overdue for us to begin charging for our content," said Jeremy Halbreich, the chairman of Sun-Times Media. "It is certainly award-winning content and we need to find new ways to support it."

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/print-edition/2012/01/13/times-union-to-study-charging-for-its.html

[duvaldude08]

I would never pay to read the in-accurate, mispelled garbage they print.

[tufsu1]

The Tallahassee Democrat started this about a year ago.

But get this....go to a specific article, then copy that web address into Google search engine, and then go to the link and read the article for free!

[dougskiles]

For the same reason I support my local bike shop and pay a little more for stuff that I could get online for less, I won't mind paying a few bucks extra a month to support the local newspaper.  I hope they find a way to survive because, like their coverage or not, they provide a valuable service to this community.

I worry that a move like this will weaken their readership numbers which may drop their advertising revenue more than they pick up from the web fees.

[Dapperdan]

I beleive we all see value in paying for soemthing like the NYT or even the Chicago Sun Times as these are national papers. Why would I pay for a local online paper, when I can go to multiple other sites and see the same basic information for free? Not a good move IMHO.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I see more to it than just charging for online services.  Social media in general is crippling the local papers.

Why am I going to pay for an online service when I get the info that I want (right, wrong or indifferent) for free on my facebook and twitter feed? 

Journalists, the one's who actually went to school to learn a craft, are getting scooped by 'insiders' and bloggers with connections to the point that a lot of stories are being ran, before any facts can be proven, just so they aren't 3 hours late getting it out, then editing the story after publishing.  Daily published papers are already 10-15 hours behind the breaking news.   

[dougskiles]

Journalists, the one's who actually went to school to learn a craft, are getting scooped by 'insiders' and bloggers with connections to the point that a lot of stories are being ran, before any facts can be proven, just so they aren't 3 hours late getting it out, then editing the story after publishing.  Daily published papers are already 10-15 hours behind the breaking news.

This is the troubling part to me.  I believe there will always be a place for good, accurate journalism in the world and I hope the professionals don't sell themselves out just to keep up the race to be first.

Perhaps media sources like the Florida Times-Union should give up on being the first to present a story and focus more on providing editorial, commentary and in-depth analysis of local issues.

As an example, I enjoy reading the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal.  I don't care enough about the business world and national politics to read about it every day.  But I do like to keep up with the general topics in the headlines and gain a better understanding of the overall issues - once a week.  I don't always agree with the political slant, however, the journalism is good and enjoyable to read.

[KenFSU]

It's really hard to convince people to pay for something that they're grown accustomed to getting for free. That said, the T-U -- warts and all -- is a valuable resource to the Jacksonville community, and the website is actually much better than the newspaper itself. I'd probably be willing to pay $3 a month to access the site. As mentioned above though, I wonder if the dramatic decrease in page views (and subsequent decrease in ad revenue) that would come from a move to a pay model would offset any additional funds brought in by subscribers. I do think it's patently absurd though to offer tiered pricing as described in the article based on whether or not you are a print subscriber.

[fieldafm]

The biz journal has been doing this for a while now (the linked article is an example). 

The difference in that is that you also get the Book of Lists and all kinds of special publications throughout the year with the Biz Journal subscription... and a weekly paper as well. 

Perhaps media sources like the Florida Times-Union should give up on being the first to present a story and focus more on providing editorial, commentary and in-depth analysis of local issues.

Bingo.  If there was a product worth paying for, I would.  Currently they don't offer me anything I can't find out on my own just eating breakfast at the Fox.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

This is the troubling part to me.  I believe there will always be a place for good, accurate journalism in the world and I hope the professionals don't sell themselves out just to keep up the race to be first.

When there's a big story, everyone wants to be the one to break it.  Why?  Hell, I don't know, I'm not a reporter.  I'd rather be the one that was right, personally, but it doesn't necessarily pay to be right, just first: 

Earlier in the week a sports blogger 'confirmed with inside sources' that Jim Caldwell was keeping his job.  The beat reporter from the local Indy paper called him to verify, and ran the story tuesday afternoon that Caldwell was safe.  The beat writer for the Colts, Kravitz, was getting ripped for not getting the story first, after all, he covers the team from the inside.  Via twitter, via bulletin boards, via facebook - the 'FACT' that Caldwell was staying and Kravitz was an ass was all over the place,  it was ugly, but he stood his ground.  As the guy covering the team, couldn't come up with one verifiable source about the coach keeping his job.

Later in the day, Irsay fires the coach, Kravitz gets it right for waiting, but the tsunami had already hit, and this is the part that is most disturbing for me and I would assume for news outlets in general:  The traffic that was generated when the first, incorrect, story came out was tremendous.  There was a period of about 2 hours that they were peaking on webhits, user comments and other page views on several different websites, when the truth came out in the late afternoon, it was like another Tuesday night.  That's a problem. 

[Clem1029]

This is probably overly cynical, but if the TU is even considering this, they should just get it over with and close up shop now. "We don't have enough money so let's charge more for the same stuff" is a signal of a failing company, end of discussion. Not to mention that they would have a huge tradeoff between the subscription charge and anything they bring in from advertising - it would pretty much obliterate their page views.

Print media is dead, and they're just trying to figure out how to apply the same model to the internet.

[fieldafm]

This is probably overly cynical, but if the TU is even considering this, they should just get it over with and close up shop now

The TU actually is a profit center for Morris.  It's the parent company that is bleeding money at the moment and they are trying to squeeze every nickel out of the pennies they have left. 

I don't have a problem with an online subscription-based service and don't have a problem with the TU trying to find relevancy in the digital age(I pay for Wall Street Journal on view it online without hesitation, and pay for the Jax Biz Journal.. and even subscribe to the Atlantic, Fast Company and Inc even though I can also view their websites for free).  But there has to be a relevant reason to pay for it.  Right now, they've gotten rid of a lot of their editorial staff and don't offer much investigative insight.  I genuinely like a few people over at the TU.  But, Melissa Ross' show (for free), MetroJacksonville.com (for free) and morning breakfast at the Fox offers better local editorial content than the TU does.   

[Tacachale]

This is probably overly cynical, but if the TU is even considering this, they should just get it over with and close up shop now

The TU actually is a profit center for Morris.  It's the parent company that is bleeding money at the moment and they are trying to squeeze every nickel out of the pennies they have left. 

That is my understanding, too. FWIW, the huge cuts demanded by the company are why the FTU can't offer the editorial and investigative content they used to. There are just too few people working after the layoffs that came despite the fact that it would be a profitable paper on its own.

I'm all for the TU doing whatever it takes to keep solvent. I don't know if this will do that or not, but they are a critically valuable asset to this community. Something's got to give; no real paper has figured out how to really make money online.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Why is this so hard. 

Excuse:  I don't buy the paper because I can get it online for free.  Solution:  Offer free online access with paid daily subscription.  An additional nominal monthly charge would be added for those who already get Weekend and Sunday if they want the online access.  The rest of us....  We can suck it.   Let us see the current front page with no additional access, teach the writers to creatively use the jump queue and let the market do what it does. 

If we really want it, we'll pay for a subscription.