There has been a flurry of press lately about, ehhh, how to save the press. At fault, of course is the nefarious internet and scheming bloggers. The most earnest and conversation-stirring of these articles comes from a cover article by Walter Isaacson, former Managing Editor of TIME and current President of the Apsen Institute. Isaacson’s “bold, old idea” is very simple: People should pay for the content they consume.
Isaacson is, IMHO, partially on the right track. He should also be pleased to know that his ideas are already in motion.
There are those who say “information wants to be free,” which sounds great, but ignores so many problems. It takes time and effort to find, organize, and communicate information in a meaningful way. Saying that quality journalism should be free is like saying “handcrafted furniture wants to be free.”
In a related example, I disagree with Michael Arrington’s assertion that the price of music will approach zero. I think anything that requires resources to produce and distribute should fetch a fair price. To rephrase Mr. Arington’s thesis, the price of distributing recorded music will approach zero. It’s the middle-man that the internet has replaced, but it will not replace the band.
I don’t know a blogger out there who would refuse payment for his or her content. And I don’t mean scraping by on insurance quote click-throughs, or product placement of the ESPN variety. Payment for the work produced. Almost sounds too good to be true, right?
With a little more help from a certain internet titan, it just might come to pass.
Charging for your product is the most basic market concept there is, but there are many ways to execute it. Razors and blades may work as a gimmick because people are already buying something, but on the internet no one even wants to open their wallet. So what’s the answer? Go to the place where more people open their wallets than anywhere else - Amazon.com
In his article Mr. Isaacson imagines a fantastic system whereby people can consume articles in an information buffet via subscription, or a la carte using small payments of pennies per article:
The key to attracting online revenue, I think, is to come up with an iTunes-easy method of micropayment.
Isaacson’s theory is a bit pie-in-the-sky at times, but the micropayment system that Isaacson imagines exists in part actually, and other parts are being developed by a variety of players. Jeff Bezos, the best CEO on Wall Street, is a true innovator. He loves books, he loves efficiency. He knows that innovation will happen and the best anyone can do is ride the wave.
Today, the NY Times costs $14 monthly on the Kindle. For the amount of time I spend reading the Times, that is a great deal. Much better than a movie ticket, a cup of coffee, or other real world “micropayments” we make every day. The problem is that it’s $14 more than free. But if the choice for consumers becomes either having to pay, or having no newspaper at all, that problem goes away. That scenario looks increasingly plausible.
Also, if I’m not a subscriber and I have to enter my credit card to pay 5 cents every time I want to read an article, I’m never going to do it. But if Amazon (or a still private service called Kachingle) kept track of my Times reading via cookies and I saw a $5 charge on my credit card for a month of miscellaneous articles, I’d think nothing of it and keep happily consuming news.
Technically there are many problems to solve, and there is the issue of getting people to pay for something that used to be free. But despite those challenges, and considering the paucity of options, I recommend the papers start talking to Mr. Bezos about outsourcing subscriptions BEYOND the Kindle. Once we get used to paying for content, we may actually get the free press we’ve always wanted.
*** Update - There happens to be a lively discussion of this same topic on NYTimes.com today. Some agree that payments could work, some not.
Loading ...
