We All Need To Sell Something Its Time For Action On Paid For Digital Media

View comments

App Store, Audit Bureau of Circulations (UK), Financial Times, Football, iPad, Patrick Smith, Paywall Strategies 2011, Rupert Murdoch, The Daily Telegraph, The New York Times, The Times, The Wall Street Journal, TheMediaBriefing Experts' Blog, United Kingdom, Facebook, Trinity Mirror

With less than 24 hours to go before TheMediaBriefingǽƒ_ªƒ_½s inaugural conference Paywall Strategies 2011, site editor and panelist Patrick Smith gives his take on the state of playǽƒ_ª¶Ý

Q. When is a paywall not a paywall?

A. When itǽƒ_ªƒ_½s business strategy involving some elements of user payments, as implemented by a sensible, modern media group.

Thatǽƒ_ªƒ_½s how I read the latest revelations, if thatǽƒ_ªƒ_½s the word, that Telegraph Media Group is thinking about introducing a metered, paid-for website in the Spring ǽƒ_ªƒ__ assumedly similar to FT.com and the model the New Yorks Times is about to launch (from Marketing/Brand Republic).

To Marketingǽƒ_ªƒ_½s reportersǽƒ_ªƒ_½ credit, the article doesnǽƒ_ªƒ_½t use the word ǽƒ_ª_paywallǽƒ_ª¶ once ǽƒ_ªƒ__ which shows a mature understanding that increasingly, there is nothing unusual nor remarkable about news organisations selling things. (TMG says that ǽƒ_ª_absolutelyǽƒ_ª¶ no final decision has been made).

Marketing also reported last year that Trinity Mirror would introduce some form of charge ǽƒ_ªƒ__ which, again, most likely isnǽƒ_ªƒ_½t a plan to build a wall but to monetise archives, niche products and Mirror.co.ukǽƒ_ªƒ_½s most engaged users.

The Telegraphǽƒ_ªƒ_½s subs plan has been coming for a while. Another of those handy ǽƒ_ª_insidersǽƒ_ª¶ told the FT last year:

ǽƒ_ª_The final decision has not been made, but it will not be an impregnable paywall like the Times. It will be a metered system or, less likely, micropayments.ǽƒ_ª_

But how would a metered system work with Telegraphǽƒ_ªƒ_½s (currently free and ad-supported) mobile products? Will TMG find its hands tied by Appleǽƒ_ªƒ_½s new inflexible subscription rules, which ban publishers from plugging cheaper offers available on its own site? Will subscribers complain, as TheTimes.co.uk customers have, that they donǽƒ_ªƒ_½t want to pay for an iPad app sub and a desktop web sub?

The FT and Economist have shown how popular, usable and marketable a single sign-on across platforms can be. But! As my former colleague Robert Andrews points out, more than 8,500 of the FTǽƒ_ªƒ_½s subscribers signed up through iPad and did so via FTǽƒ_ªƒ_½s own in-app system ǽƒ_ªƒ_ so if the new Apple rules were in place, the FT would have lost out on close to $1 million.

Strength in numbers

And hereǽƒ_ªƒ_½s another thought: Telegraph.co.uk is the UKǽƒ_ªƒ_½s third most-visited news site with 31 million unique visitors in December (so says ABCe). If Telegraph does join FT.com, TheTimes.co.uk, TheSundayTimes.co.uk, NewsoftheWorld.co.uk, TheSun.co.uk, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and countless B2B titles in taking its content away from the free news economy ǽƒ_ªƒ__ thatǽƒ_ªƒ_½s a lot of journalism only available to paying readers.

The hope for paid content enthusiasts is that paying for news (and media ǽƒ_ª_stuffǽƒ_ª¶ generally) becomes normalised ǽƒ_ªƒ__ a cultural acceptance across age groups. Rupert Murdoch wants this more than anything, hence his challenge to other media owners to follow him in setting the price of media without interference from a fickle, scarce-value digital ad market.

Of course, it seems the Telegraph isnǽƒ_ªƒ_½t signing up to old Rupeǽƒ_ªƒ_½s grand plan: it doesnǽƒ_ªƒ_½t want a ǽƒ_ª_paywallǽƒ_ª¶ to lock out non-subscribers and ditch the global audience itǽƒ_ªƒ_½s invested so much in building ǽƒ_ªƒ__ it just wants to monetise the most engaged users and (I suspect) to entice niche subscriptions to specific content vertical and services (sport, fashion, crosswords, fantasy football etc).

The problem with ads

The internet overtook print (in the UK ǽƒ_ªƒ__ not globally) in terms of ad spend last year. But as Seamus McCauley and others have argued, when it comes to CPM rates, Facebook is winning.

Peter Kirwan is very good on this in our research report on paywalls, and quotes New York Timesǽƒ_ªƒ_½ David Carr:

ǽƒ_ª_For a long time, newspapers assumed that as their print advertising declined, it would be intersected by a surging line of online advertising revenue. But that revenue is no longer growing at many newspaper sites, so if the lines cross, it will be because the print revenue is saying hello on its way to the basement.ǽƒ_ª¶

Sure, you can be clever with targeting, profiling and getting to know your readers, to give advertisers more data about your audience ǽƒ_ªƒ__ Paul Hood is doing this at Trinity Mirror.

Yet one thing is clear to me: No media group can afford not to sell at least something digitally. Whether itǽƒ_ªƒ_½s apps, digital subscriptions, reports, clubs, games, individual stories, services, personalised news feedsǽƒ_ª¶Ý These are all part of the new publishing economy.

And itǽƒ_ªƒ_½s also worth remembering: no one has ruled anything out.

Tomorrow at Paywall Strategies 2011, weǽƒ_ªƒ_½ll be debating these issues and more: follow our coverage throughout the day on TheMediaBriefing.com and @MediaBrief ǽƒ_ªƒ__ and if you want to join the conversation online, follow the #paywalls11 hashtag.

comments powered by Disqus

Agile web development by Byte9