Much of these conversations are being sparked by the reports of the NY Times Online putting up some sort of paywall. Here is what I think they should do:
Go to a pay model, but the pay model should be for the first 12 hours of any article/story. Meaning, if the Times publishes an article about the latest angel investment I made, then for the first 12 hours of that article’s existence on the Times online, it would only be accessible by subscribers.
Why I think this works:
1. Online subscription model generates revenue for the NY Times
2. Stories go “public” after 12 hours, which allows for page consumption (and views) beyond the subscriber base thus increasing inventory for the NY Times sales force to sell against (advertising)
3. Online subscription model creates a velvet rope, less-so about actually consuming the content, but more-so about recency of consumption (all about getting it first)
| — |
Opening My Wallet For Media Consumption | Darren Herman Sawickipedia: Time is money so I tend to agree that immediate access is usually worth something. 12 hours is likely too long (likely 4 or less would work better). What I like about the current debate around paywalls is its not about paying for the content - its about paying for features around the content: immediacy of access, community (ie moves - people aren’t paying for the film their paying for the experience of going to the theater, etc.). Content does want to be free, but features sure don’t. |
