Rupert Murdoch's Latest Foray Into Online News Business Models… Not So Ridiculous
from the hold-on-here... dept
We’ve chronicled Rupert Murdoch’s flip-flopping on charging for news online (he originally claimed that free news made sense, and he wanted to free up the WSJ, but now says all of his news sites should have paywalls). And a bunch of folks have sent in Michael Wolff’s Vanity Fair profile of Murdoch as a clueless luddite on the internet, and someone who doesn’t seem to care about the important nuances of why or how charging for news might not make much sense. Wolff paints Murdoch as the type of guy who just thinks he can bully the entire market into agreeing that people should pay for news online. In that article, Wolff discusses the tension between the Times of London and The Sunday Times, which are separate operations owned by Murdoch, but share a web site. However, apparently that’s changing, and Wolff presents it as an opportunity to start charging for The Sunday Times online, since it won’t be “losing” anyone via putting up a paywall (the question remains if it would gain anyone).
And yet… the recent revelation of a new business model experiment by the two papers suggests an approach that is a bit more nuanced — even if the (competing) Guardian’s explanation of it isn’t particularly enlightening. The plan appears to be not to charge for news but to charge for some kind of membership club which provides additional benefits, along with the paper. So, becoming a member gives you the ability to add certain “packs” of information to your paper. I’m not sure how compelling that is. However, it’s also going to involve access to events and discounts on other goods and services (including Murdoch-owned satellite TV service, Sky+).
While it may depend on what’s really included in this offer, initially it makes quite a bit of sense. It’s not based on locking up the web content or limiting how it can be used, but in providing additional scarce value that people will buy. Who knows if this is an indicator of what Murdoch is planning — but it’s significantly different than a paywall, and a lot more reasonable, economically speaking.
Filed Under: business models, journalism, news, paywall, rupert murdoch, times+
Companies: news corp
Comments on “Rupert Murdoch's Latest Foray Into Online News Business Models… Not So Ridiculous”
depends on the offer here
this could go anywhere from wasteful/stupid to a legitimate/good idea. It all depends on what is introduced as part of this “membership”.
Re: depends on the offer here
Uh, yeah, it’s Murdoch, so why don’t we all just agree not to hold our collective breath, shall we?
Re: Re: depends on the offer here
Oh, and FYI, I learned long ago not to trust people named after MacGuyver villains….
Re: Re: Re: depends on the offer here
+1
Rupert…Murdoch…not…ridiculous…?
Does…not…compute, brain…melting…
Pedantry Corner
It’s not the Times of London, it’s The Times.
Re: Pedantry Corner
arguably the ‘of London’ bit is a clarification to avoid confusing the ignorant as to which Times was meant, rather than part of the name.
…
the amount of snark involved in making any further comment advises me t hat it’s better to stop here 😀
Re: Pedantry Corner
Which London are you talking about? London,ON ?
Paywall Foxnews
Can you please put a paywall on foxnews? Please… Please….
Re: Paywall Foxnews
ha, you libs all want to silence other opinions.
Re: Re: Paywall Foxnews
“want to silence other opinions”
So you admit that it is not news?
Is it fair and balanced or unscrupulous and one sided?
If you are going to teabag the nation, you’re going to need a Dick Armey
Re: Re: Paywall Foxnews
“ha, you libs all want to silence other opinions.”
Well, as a staunch Independant, let me say this: I want people to stop listening to both sides of the stupid spectrum. I have as much use for Fox News as I do for NBC Nightly News on the other side, which is to say none at all.
In all honesty, how can one claim to be a conservative network AND pretend to offer the “news”? No, you idiots, you’re offering CONSERVATIVE VIEWPOINTS, and that ain’t news. My favorite is their tagline: fair and balance.
My ass. I have no love for the liberal media channels either, mind you. Both of them are full of shit. So where do you get real news? On a national level: probably nowhere. But I like my local news folks. They might have a bias too, but it sure as shit doesn’t come shining through like Murdoch’s goons or MSNBC’s gang of retards…
La Nacion, Argentina’s most traditional newspaper has implemented this idea nicely. If you sucribe to the newspaper you become member of “Club La Nacion”. The membership is pretty valuable because with it, for example, you obtain discount in several things. My favourite is 2×1 in most cinemas.
The strange thing is that they started with it years before the internet.
Judicial Balancing
The mistake is not to employ balancing for copyright law. The mistake is to think that judicial balancing is a valid method for resolving any dispute. Balancing is nothing more than the emperors clothes placed over political choices. Or as one professor of mine put it years ago- some day they are going to let us into the back room where the balancing is done and we will find ourselves knee deep in quarters. Heads I win tails you lose
legitimate internet businesses
Hey thanks for the great information on legitimate online businesses. I search the net looking for this type of content to give me ideas on future articles that I am going to write on this same general subject. Appreciated reading your article and information on this particular subject.
Great content
Thanks for the great content. I’m always searching the net for content that will give me some new ideas for my own blogs and legitimate online businesses. Thanks for the great article.
Brad
Rupert
I’m not a fan of Rupert’s but I have to admit that he is very successful and that we could probably learn a lot from him.