« I Have a Confession to Make: TOO MUCH EATING OUT! | Main | Update on Beth’s Fundraiser – 64% of the Way There! »
Murdoch Vows to Charge For All Online Content
By JLP | August 5, 2009
Rupert Murdoch has vowed to charge for all the online content of his newspapers and television news channels, going well beyond his prediction in May that the company would test pay models on one of its stronger papers within the year.
Will he be able to do it? I don’t think so. I subscribe to the Wall Street Journal and Barron’s but I don’t I’d pay for any of their other content. I think they will end up shooting themselves in the foot.
What are your thoughts?
Topics: Business News | 11 Comments »
August 5th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Different strokes for different folks, but I can’t imagine paying for what you can get for free. I’m already disgruntled that I have to pay for basic cable TV. As far as the internet, it has saved this household money from the start, and a great part of its appeal is that the content is free. Others might feel differently than you and I do, though.
August 6th, 2009 at 12:44 am
I won’t be paying for it. Not as long as I can get quality information for free almost anywhere else.
August 6th, 2009 at 9:24 am
I heard this on CNBC today too, but I don’t think it’ll work out. People are too used to getting information for free on the internet; if foxnews is subscription based, why wouldn’t I go to WSJ or CNBC or CNN .coms?
August 6th, 2009 at 9:53 am
And I vow to never pay for it (at least directly). What happened to the ‘ads’ business?
August 6th, 2009 at 10:02 am
LOL,
I’m not sure. I know ad revenue has slowed recently.
I can’t imagine people paying for most content either. It will also mess up the way the internet works in that whenever people find something they like, they share it with others. If everyone is charging for content, that model is broken.
As a blogger, there are things I don’t like about the internet. Full feeds is one of them. It bugs me that I write stuff and people read it all without visiting my site.
August 6th, 2009 at 10:57 am
JLP: not sure how the RSS feeds work, but perhaps you can make the ‘feeds’ subscription (pay based), yet keep your website free (paid via ads) ?
August 6th, 2009 at 11:03 am
LOL,
Just like with the media, there are lots of blogs out there. People wouldn’t pay for my content when they can get it for free elsewhere.
August 6th, 2009 at 11:53 am
I think it’s a very interesting time in media that we’ve never experienced before and decision makers are still trying to find the right balance. I could understand Murdoch charging for some premium services, but if everything becomes regulated by fees he will lose a lot of traffic. A loss in traffic will likely result in a loss in ad sales. A loss in ad sales will likely result in the death of his media empire.
August 7th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Well, considering I’m suspicious of the veracity of a lot of what passes for “news” these days, he can feel free to charge. I’m not buying.
August 16th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
JLP,
Now that newspapers are struggling for their lives they are trying to figure out a way to stay alive as companies on the Internet. Charging for content likely won’t gain traction. They have to try to make it through ads, like Google does.
August 23rd, 2009 at 12:02 pm
I’d be willing to pay say a premium but couldn’t be the way the sites are now. For example I’d pay to get complete access to get fox news, like being able to stream the video live not just a few clips per hour.