Afternoon:
10°c
New York Times plans to charge for online content
Ben Bailey14 Jul 2009
The New York Times could start charging for its online content “within three to four weeks”, according to reports.
The Financial Times reported that a source “familiar” with the New York Times said the decision could be made within weeks, although a spokeswoman for the company said that no time frame had been put forward for making any such announcement.
In 2007 the New York Times abandoned a model whereby they charged readers for access to their archives and columns as, despite having 200,000 subscribers, the revenues were too low to sustain the service.
Arthur Sulzberger, the group's chairman, said: “While Times Select generated more than 200,000 subscriptions and around $10m, we decided to end this initiative.”
The news could trigger an industry change in online journalism. Currently most news organisations provide their content online for free, although certain business publishers including the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal do charge users.
The news follows an announcement by Rupert Murdoch that News Corporation will begin to charge for its newspapers' online content within a year. Murdoch confirmed that this could include content available on The Sun and Times websites.
Guardian Media Group chief executive Carolyn McCall has also suggested that internet users could be charged for specialist material. She said: “Charging for B2B is the way to go.”
Any move to charge for internet content would reflect a significant policy change as news organisations battle over a global online audience, while also facing falling advertising revenues and readerships across the industry.
Yet despite a need for media outlets to source new revenues, publishers are also concerned that a move to charge for digital content could see a massive drop off in traffic to their sites and ultimately damage advertising streams.
Falling advertising has already forced the New York Times group to mortgage its headquarters in downtown Manhattan. They also borrowed $250m from Carlos Slim, a Mexican telecoms billionaire, and are seeing heavy cuts to their operations at the Boston Globe.
Whether British newspapers begin widespread charging for online content remains to be seen. While the short-term outcome may stay the same, the long-term results for the future of online journalism may well rely on the success or failure of the New York Times' venture.
Reader views (6)
I appreciate getting The New York Times free on-line now, and I would readily pay for it if there's a change in policy. I don't want this premier newspaper to go bankrupt. If it did, where would countless other news organizations get their content? They all steal from the Times, now, e.g. "According to a story today in the New York Times..."
- Bob, Glen Rock, New Jersey, USA, 15/07/2009 14:20
Report abuse
The quality of the journalism in the New York Times is falling as fast as their bottom line. I don't think either trend will change direction because of subscription charges. Perhaps their horde of highly paid columnists and reporters should begin to think about other ways to find their "millions" of readers and to support themselves.
- Bloke, London, 15/07/2009 13:30
Report abuse
I was delighted to find, one day, that I was receiving the complete New York Times each day at 10 am. for nothing. I still don't know why or how I got it, but I have received it for years.
I glance through it briefly but would not pay $5 per month for it. There are too many other ways to get free news on-line.
When one reads the NYT online, there are many ads to sit through or overcome and I imagined this provided revenue.
I don't think many readers will wish to pay, so will wait to see what happens. If all else fails, BBC News will be my source of news.
My reason for no longer reading newspapers, which I used to LOVE, is the falling standard of journalism and reporting, and the cost of buying papers, which in Spain can be two or three euros, over five for Sunday editions, incomplete and fairly thin.
- Harold Carlton, London, England, 14/07/2009 23:37
Report abuse
The NYT is losing it. But there are none so blind...
- Peter Seekings-Foster, Mildenhall, Suffolk., 14/07/2009 21:12
Report abuse
popularity will decrease
- Kaiserimam, Harrow UK, 14/07/2009 15:54
Report abuse
Nobody will pay to view news online.
This is the dumbest idea ever.
- Timon, London, 14/07/2009 12:56
Report abuse
