From the GLOBE AND POST:
…In 2012, [paywalls are] moving from experimentation to operational,” said Ken Doctor, a U.S. media analyst and author of Newsonomics. The need for newspapers to quickly adopt a digital subscription model is gaining momentum, he believes, and it’s crucial that companies establish the value of digital content in the minds of readers now. Mr. Doctor estimates that within three years, many papers will see more than a third of their readers accessing the product only on tablets.
“I believe that the end game for most media companies is not the value of paywalls; it’s ultimately the value of bundled subscriptions,” said Earl Wilkinson, the executive director and chief executive of the International Newsmedia Marketing Association.
Bundles can also boost the performance of the printed paper, since a print subscription can offer a more reasonable price for an all-access pass: New York Times subscribers, for example, can choose a digital-only subscription that provides website and smartphone access for $15 every four weeks, or website and tablet for $20 – or they can sign up for home delivery of the Sunday paper, which comes with free digital access, for $19.60 in the greater New York area. That’s keeping some readers tied to the paper at least one day a week, a major value for publishers who still rely on print advertising and circulation for the bulk of their revenue…
Click here to read the full article.
EDITOR: This is wonderful news for democracy because once again major print media will have adequate revenues and earnings plus an inducement to compete with one another for subscribers through superior reporting. The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal , The Financial Times, and USA Today, along with others and current periodicals, have no captive audience as does the Lancaster Newspapers and other primarily local periodicals. Competitions among the national and international ‘giants’ will hopefully result in adequate funding of investigatory reporting, without which there is no media watchdog.
To Include Lancaster Newspapers in the same paragraph as the New York Times, Washington Post and USA Today is an affront to those stellar newspapers. To include Lancaster Newspapers in the same context as ‘superior reporting’ is an embarrassement to those who are superior (or even very good, above average and those that are fair)!!!
I’m sure that LNP in it’s never-ending quest for the ultimate ‘money pot’ will continue to grease the skids for the power=brokers that can help them turn a buck. “Superior reporting’ be damned!!!!!