An idea is gaining momentum: online readers must open their wallet. In recent weeks, several suggestions for moving from wish to implementation have popped up. The latest one comes from Google. The company proposes to give a boost to its not-so-successful Checkout service by harnessing it to online newspapers interests. Quite a change here. Only a few months ago, Google’s haughty advice to the newspaper industry was : You’re on your own guys ; Darwin is in charge here ; adapt or face extinction. Last November in Paris, I personally witnessed Googlers’ poor performance in front of media barons — an embarrassing mixture of unpreparedness and arrogance. Some of us felt really sorry the search giant screwed up so badly.
Google was slow, but it finally got it. It understood that its position — “Thank us to the billion clicks a month we send to your sites, we bring value to your businesses, the rest is your problem” — was no longer defendable. Google can no longer ignore the dramatic deterioration of the news media sector.
Here are key figures for the US market:
- The best recent period was 2005 ; that year, US newspapers reported a total advertising revenue of $49.4bn. 96% from print (35% from classifieds) and 4% from online. Since then, between 2005 and 2008, things changed dramatically :
Total ad revenue :…….. -23.4%
Print:………………………..-26,7% (and a drop in classifieds of -42.4%)
Online:……………………..+53,4%
It looks like this :

Now, to get a more precise and recent representation, let’s compare the last available quarter (Q2 2009), with the recession’s impact, to Q2 2005. Here is the evolution over four years :
Total ad revenue:……………-44%
Print:…………………………….-47% (classifieds dropping by : -64%)
Online:………………………….+30%
An important precision for the online ad revenue: it peaked in Q4 2007; since then it has dropped by 23% in Q2 2009. As for its share in the total revenue stream, it felt from 14.7% of the total for Q4 2007 to a mere 10.5% of the industry’s total advertising revenue. (Source : NAA). In a nutshell, American newspapers have invested quite a bit in a sector that is losing both in terms of absolute amount and percentage contribution to the revenue stream. OK, a large part of it is due to the recession, but no one knows exactly how much of the decline is structural (due to the exponentially growing inventory among other factors).
European newspapers suffered less, mostly because of their limited dependency on advertising. Also, the economy’s downturn was less brutal. But seeing down here a soft “L” shaped economic cycle, while others will more likely endure a hard “U” curve elsewhere is a meager consolation. Speaking of the impact of the recession across all medias, watch this chart from Business Insider, which shows the “advertising apocalypse”.
In itself, this deterioration explains the rehabilitation of the paid-for content idea. Fact is : advertising doesn’t work as expected for news websites. Everywhere in the world, volumes dropped (that’s the recession part). But more worrisome, prices dropped as well (consensus is around minus 30% over the last 18 months), with a “ratchet effect” that will make it difficult for prices to come back to the pre-crisis level. Google bears some responsibility in this state of affairs: it forced a large chunk of the advertising market to shift to text-ads with the G-model built on large volumes and low per unit cost. Of course, Google got used to saying that, with 25,000+ sources of information on Google News worldwide (talk about information overload…), the company could afford to lose a few. But it finally yielded to facts and decided it should come up with a way to monetize online news. Well, It helped when the Newspaper Association of America issued a Request for Information, for third parties willing to create a centralized payment platform.
The first respondent was Journalism Online, a New York-based venture that media entrepreneur Steven Brill created a few months ago in association with Gordon Crovitz, the former Wall Street Journal publisher. These are high-caliber people. Journalism Online’s idea is erecting well-designed pay walls for news content, and “Preserving Valuable Journalism by Restoring the Value Proposition”. (Read Steven Brill’s interesting keynote speech at the last online publishing and marketing OMMA conference). Journalism Online’s full response to the NAA’s request is available here.
The second response came from Google with a platform based on its Checkout payment system. Google enters the fray with an impressive line-up: its huge, globe-spanning server infrastructure, technical expertise, economies of scale and, probably, a cheaper alternative to Journalism Online’s 20% fee. (Google’s full response to NAA is here).
Let’s summarize the key components of a modern paid-for system for news sites. The list below is based on the two proposals, on other papers addressing the issue, and on discussions I had with publishers:
- Single sign-on system. Forget about a proprietary transaction system. There is no room, nor time, for reinventing the wheel here. Actually, the only viable option is mutualizing the “wheel”, with broad multi-publication passes and proportional revenue redistribution. Hence the question : who will be the grand consolidator? We better keep a choice of platforms — as long as they are linked.
- Diversity of models. We need the ability to handle subscriptions and paid-per-article models as well as packages and bundles. Flexibility, adjustability will be key (and yes, it complicates the system, but that’s what we have computer systems for).
- A unified, “Friction free” micropayment system. The best examples are well-known: Amazon’s or iTunes’ “one-click” option allows impulse, hassle-free buying. To be asked for a password when you want a special report, or access to a special part of the site is out of question. We can even dream of cross-connected platforms: my subscription to Le Monde.fr tied to The New York Times’, and the system allowing the occasional purchase of a 5000 words feature in Vanity Fair. To those who roll their eyes thinking this is too convoluted, think about the Sabre or Amadeus airlines reservation platform that makes possible to book a flight from San Francisco to Kirkenes (Norway) across three different airlines: that is complicated.
- A cross media brands consolidation system. It aggregates micro-transactions (down to one cent) into monthlies and annuals.
- A database system. It provides multi-support subscription management, print and online, allowing combined marketing operations.
- Flexibility in pay-wall options. Publishers should be able to decide almost on the fly which content lives in the paid-zone system. Some will go for a package policy (x articles for y dollars or euros), other will charge on a per-view basis. Everyone should have the leeway to organize promotions and special operations based on news cycle or predictable events in sports or politics for instance.
- Ability to decide the criteria upon which some readers will be charged while others won’t. This goes well beyond the simple basic vs. premium concept; at some point usage intensity will have to be factored in, meaning the first taste is free but you must pay of you keep coming back. Weirdly, all the papers I’m reading on the subject don’t do much to explore this notion; it is crucial to readership segmentation.
- Search engine management. For pay walls, the most quoted inconvenience is this: the huge traffic sent by search requests (frequently 40% of the total) ends up at the “subscription only” wall. Publishers must be smart in dealing with this fact: a reader who lands on their site doesn’t have to be rejected simply because he’s a first time visitor. Quite the contrary, actually. There are many ways to go around this obstacle, we’ll explore those later.
- (Most probably) An advertising management system. It will have to be embedded in the transaction system because the CPM structure is different between free and paid zones. Experience shows that an ad behind a pay wall commands a higher price: a 30% premium doesn’t seems overly optimistic.
- Integration of mobile terminals. Ignoring or treating separately eBooks, iPhone or Blackberrys would be a terrible mistake. That’s were the real money is.
Today, we just scratched the payment question’s surface. In the coming weeks we’ll explore realistic news consumptions patterns and see how those could translate and define a reliable transaction system. It will also be quite interesting to see how publishers will deal with the two proposals (so far), from Journalism Online and Google. —FF
Related columns:
- US newspapers are gaining readers online TweetAccording to Nielsen data, US newspapers online audience has grown by 6% last year, with 38% of online users visiting a paper’s site regularly. This evolution is less significant than the corresponding shift in advertising that recorded a 21% growth for online papers vs. a loss of 6% in their print operations. > Story in [...]...
- The News Cycle Heartbeat TweetHow do mainstream media and blogs interact? How do they feed each other ? Everyone in the newsmedia would love to get a better view of the mating dance. A few weeks ago, scientists at the Cornell University unveiled a thorough analysis of the relationship between the two universes. Borrowing from genomics techniques, they dug [...]...
- Paid news on Mobile. Why it could fly. TweetThis week, I downloaded the iPhone application of the British newspaper the Independent. It’s a new breed of app, taking advantage of the new features embedded in the third iteration of the iPhone OS. For a daily newsmedia, Push Notification is the most interesting new feature, combined, in this case, with an offline reader. On [...]...
- The end of the breaking news — as we know it TweetIn the internet storm sweeping the media, breaking news is, without a doubt, the main casualty. This branch of the information stream is the most likely one to endure a kind of “commodity syndrome”. The breaking news circa 2010 will be ubiquitous, instantaneous and simultaneous. Its value, its market price actually, will tend to zero [...]...
- Young readers: already hooked on subsidies TweetI love my country. Among many things, I enjoy its business attitude. In the media sector, it is an unabashed mixture of entrepreneurship, bold risk-taking and fearless independence. You can’t spend a week here without someone telling you : “Hey, you know what? We’re about to send some of our journalists, paid by the Ministry [...]...





11 Comments
Great sum up of the state of the debate.
Supply side, news agencies and content providers, the issue is greatly and repeteadly explained: there is a need of generating more cash for content generation.
Maybe we all should focus in the demmand side and concentrate in what final customers are willing to pay.
Probably, we are basing solutions and answers in a demand-oriented wishful thinking.
sorry, I meant, supply-oriented wishful thinking. It means, we are analyzing only one side of the equation.
Great post!
Thank you for a very interesting post about how media sites can make readers pay for news. I think you are summarizing very well what should be key components in a paid-for system for news sites.
But there is an even more difficult and pressing question that you are not discussing very much: To what extent are users willing to pay for the content typically provided by news sites?
The challenge is that news content is so abundant in most markets online. If one site starts charging, users often will find numerous alternatives for the same type of content. Traditionally newspapers have specialized in being very good at broad and popular content areas. However, in the online world willingness to pay seems to be highest for niche content.
I agree that news sites need to start getting revenues from their users. But I suspect that the process of identifying the content in which there is a willingnes to pay will prove to be a much more difficult process than many editors imagine. The best payment system in the world wil not be of much help if editors do not succeed in this tough task.
So what are the content areas and ways of packaging the content that makes it possible to charge online? What are the attractive premium products news sites can develop in the digital world?
As a general payment model, this is a great analysis. I completely with your stance to simplify the process for both publishers and consumers.
However you ignore the reality that online viewers are just not prepared to pay for digital news, no matter how easy or cheap it may be. The first newspaper to set up a paywall will bleed readers to the advantage of the next free competitor (there will always be a free competitor on the web).
Only a very small niche of very skilled journalists with premium content and very dedicated readers will be able to make money. Even for those, it will never be sufficient revenues to support large media organizations.
A decentralization and democratization of media production is well on the way, where the one-to-many communication of yesterday will not survive: The mentality that you can charge for a transcript of an event that took place in in an environment of real-time global information sharing.
Great article – and the above commenters have beaten me too the major issue here… spec’ing out the delivery mechanism and supply-side challenges are the easy part of the solution. Actually creating a service that users are willing to pay for is the hard part.
Lots of people sell music. But only Apple has managed to tie it in with a compelling experience and superb devices. And even then, their music sales side doesn’t really hold its own in terms of profitability…
There could potentially be a few misconceptions here:
1. that Google is offering a micropayment solution based on its failed Checkout project is not very interesting in itself. Newspaper companies seem obsessed by micropayment and tablet technologies these days. When there is demand, there will most likely be supply. As underlined above the crucial question is instead: what should consumers micropay newspapers for?
2. its not “niche” content that consumers are willing to pay for – it’s content that is scarce and attractive. A major issue for newspapers is that the content categories that they have profitably championed for centuries are neither scarce nor attractive in the online world
3. it could be too early to conclude that advertising won’t support pivotal content sites
a) in Scandinavia a few content-based reach leaders are actually profitable
b) most of the companies (newspaper groups) that are used as examples of the failed model were unlikely to succeed in the first place
i) no cost culture: due to their monopolistic, high profit legacy these organisations are not used to run tight ships
ii) lack of fertile ground for innovation: until recently the most powerful force in these companies, the journalists, regarded advertising a necessary evil. Also they treated their fellow collegues, the ad sales people, as inferiors creatures. Not exacly an environment that stimulates “innovation through cross-functional collaboration”
To complete Andreas and Aleks’ comments above, there is an other point that should be considered carefully when marketing content: the psychological point. A customer can easily and quickly decide to buy a song for few cents because he knows what he’ll have (he can listen to extract before buying or, listen to the radio), he knows to which (fan/social) group he’ll join by adding a specific song in his library and, he’ll keep this song for life… With the (unconscious) happiness to listen to it 30 years later ! When comes the content, the buying decision is more tricky: you don’t really know what you’re buying, and the value of what you’re buying will quickly (instantaneously ?) decrease. Buying content implies either a strong will from the customer, or… weakness for sweet things (assuming content is a cotton candy for your brain…)
A JOKE! ) Why does Santa Claus go down the chimney on Christmas Eve?Because it SOOTS him!
___________________________
–/ vaiagra 50mg /–
Thank you for the link..
thank you for all this new and useful information, it will most certainly come in handy
thanks for sharing.I enjoy it.
8 Trackbacks
[...] Full MondayNote post at this link… [...]
[...] How to make readers pay for news [...]
[...] is the original post: How to make readers pay for news | Monday Note How to make readers pay for news | Monday Note Posted in General, Uncategorized Tags: advertising, content, crowdsourcing, how to, iphone, [...]
[...] Full MondayNote post at this link… [...]
[...] How to make readers pay for news. A long and (as usual) useful post from Frédéric Filloux at the Monday Note. Includes this — “Fact is : advertising doesn’t work as expected for news websites.” — and the first comprehensive (and logical) list of requirements for a modern payment scheme that I’ve seen. This will all be fleshed out in subsequent posts, which promise to be worthwhile reading. [...]
[...] How to make readers pay for news (Monday Note) An idea is gaining momentum: Online readers must open their wallet. This article looks at some of the options for payment systems. Also: I strongly recommend you to sign up for the weekly newsletter from Monday Note. Their analysises are always worth reading. [...]
[...] How to make readers pay for news | Monday Note – A really detailed and interesting pre-amble to the whole pay model debate in media. [...]
[...] (et ancien directeur des éditions électroniques de Libération), qui a montré dans ses billets comment la valeur des inventaires publicitaires Web des journaux avait fondu, et pourquoi le payant devait faire un retour en [...]