From family-owned independents to the largest national chain, it’s become clear that most U.S. newspapers will soon charge readers to visit their websites.
And when they finally decide to take the leap, these papers typically
trot out a column or interview by a top editor or publisher explaining
why they’re pulling the switcheroo.
Sometimes they’re straightforward.
But more often, they tend to sound the same — by turns sheepish and defiant, full of vague buzzwords and unclear reasoning. Here’s what I wish they’d say.
Dear Readers,
Since this is a newspaper, and we’re supposed to put the biggest news
right at the top, I’ll get right to it: We’re going to start charging
you money to visit our website. That’s obviously a big change, but it
doesn’t look like online advertising will start paying the bills anytime
soon. So now it’s your turn.
If you’re thinking that sounds kind of desperate, you’re right.
Newspapering was a stable thing for a long time. Then the Web came
along and unlocked an endless supply of ad space — which, unlike old
print advertising, also came with the ability to track how well an ad
performed.
So we’ve had to cut costs, and that mostly means people. Buyouts,
layoffs, unpaid days off, renegotiated contracts — you name it, we’ve
done it. And I know you can tell the difference. Between advertisers
buying fewer pages and fewer journalists producing news, our product has
definitely declined. If you’ve picked up the printed version of the
paper on any given Monday, you know what I’m talking about. The thing is
so thin that when the paperboys try to toss it, it just kind of
flutters away. I hear a few of them have taken to folding it up into a
paper airplane. But at least we haven’t started cutting the number of
days we publish! Not yet, anyway.
http://cognoscenti.wbur.org/2013/03/11/paywall-curt-woodward
No comments:
Post a Comment