Weblog Consulting Register Login Subscribe to Free Influx Emails Join our Facebook Group Follow us on Twitter Branding Street Cred Technology Lifestyle Style Entertainment Interviews Art InfluxTV Map Widgets RSS — All Subjects RSS — More Feeds

Search

Advanced Search

Contact Privacy Policy

It looks like News Corporation has made the decision to start charging for its online content. Although this is not new news, this whole topic was discussed and experimented with in the early days of Web 1.0, it's now back on the agenda. With newspapers struggling for revenue, this seems to be the only way they can go.

However, it's fraught with problems. Most internet users are pretty accustomed to free content and suddenly putting up walled gardens everywhere could have a huge impact on viewership and hence lead to massive declines in ad revenue. It will be interesting to see how much solidarity there will be between the different publishers and if some titles can benefit from holding out and not jumping into the fray.

In the end, newspapers have little choice, but to find new ways to make money. The simple fee based model for subs and article access might not be enough. These publishers are going to have to think harder about adding value to make this really attractive. If they use their imaginations, they will discover hundreds of ways of making an online newspaper subscription attractive.

If you're a newspaper publisher and you think the solution is a digital facsimile of the analog version, you need to re-think.


Posted by Ed Cotton From the panel I ran in New Orleans for the AAAA's media conference, the group of twentysomethings I interviewed were pretty clear that news is headline based and something to be skimmed and probably something that should be free.

It's as if it's part of the ambient information; a news feed from a news organization or a friend on Facebook.

The challenge for newspapers is obviously to work out a business model that works, but it's clear the value of their work in the world is being undermined by the ubiquity of the feed.

The future is not about skimming, it shouldn't JUST be like this.

It's clear the world would be a much worse off without journalism, but we won't know that until it's gone for ever.

Perhaps newspaper associations and journalist unions need to band together to tell their story.


Posted by Ed Cotton "Google -- I mean, the harsh way of just defining it, Google devalues everything it touches. Google is great for Google, but it's terrible for content providers, because it divides that content quantitatively rather than qualitatively. And if you are going to get people to pay for content, you have to encourage them to make qualitative decisions about that content."

Robert Thomson- WSJ- Charlie Rose Show- February 11th, 2009


Posted by Ed Cotton Russell and Ben's little experiment of turning blog posts into a newspaper is simply brilliant.



Here are some random reasons why?

1. Reminds us of the importance of the tactile

2. Celebrates a medium that others are writing off as dead

3. Makes the temporary, more permanent

4. Creates something desirable and iconic

5. It's great marketing


Posted by Ed Cotton Bill Tancer of Hitwise recently presented some interesting stats on participation levels on Web 2.0 sites, his research found that only .16% of all YouTube visits were to upload video and only 0.2% of Flickr visits were to upload photographs.

As we are in the “Participation Age” there seems to be a need to expand the number of participants. It’s questionable if brands are doing enough and by brands, we mean these Web 2 brands and creative brands in general; video cameras, computer brands, digital camera brands, printer brands, etc….

Obviously, the 1% rule is being played out, but think of the market potential if that 1% could be increased to 2%.

Brands in this space need to think about how they can encourage participation, this is part incentive and partly education. The education part is important and can obviously there need to be different streams for different segments; from the non-user, to the user who isn’t interested in sharing.

Clearly all brands that want to move into the Web 2 space and create community and conversation need to listen up, this stuff doesn’t just magically happen, it needs encouragement and education.

One interesting example is the Daily Telegraph newspaper in the UK, yesterday it launched a blogging service for its readers. For many, this could sound foolish, given the abundance of free blogging platforms, but this is smart as it’s going to attract their readers who trust DT more than the small blogging brands. In addition, in a challenging time for newspapers, there is a lot to gain by doing this and is reaching out and providing education and utility for a new group of participants.



Participation is the tangible offshoot of engagement, which has become the fashionable thing to try and measure these days.

It’s clear, if brands want thriving communities and strong brand relationships, they need do more than pay lip service to the notion of participation.

Is participation a new metric for engagement?