UK, French Newspapers to Charge for Content

[SoCalDem]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/192558/uk_french_newspapers_to_charge_for_content.html

Jeremy Kirk, IDG News Service
Mar 26, 2010 6:30 am


British newspapers The Times and the Sunday Times will charge for content on their Web sites, a move following other major papers seeking to profit from online readers amid falling print revenues.

The papers, which now have one combined Web site, will be split into two sites: thetimes.co.uk and thesundaytimes.co.uk. Starting in June, readers can purchase one-day access for £1 (US$1.50) or a week's access for £2. Print subscribers will get free access to both sites, according to The Times. Both papers are owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., which also owns The Wall Street Journal. Murdoch has supported introducing pay walls and plans to do the same for two other newspapers, The Sun and The News of the World.

Times Editor James Harding told Sky News that online journalism is not worthless. Despite free newspapers and free content on the Internet, people will pay for quality information. "For that, I think people will come to our papers," he said. Le Monde in France said earlier this week it will begin charging for some content on March 29. It will offer a package subscription to its Web site, print edition and access to content via Apple's iPhone. That will cost €19.90 (US$26.46) per month for the first three months, then €29.90 per month. Access to the paper solely through the iPhone will cost €15 (US$19.95) per month.

snip

[dipsydoodle]

1. Last year The Times apparently made a loss of £87m

Their justification for charging for online content is that whilst it wouldn't make the loss worse in future it may reduce the loss which would be satidfactory. Bit difficult to fault that really. If they don't get enough takers then presumbly they'd close the website and save money that way.

[truebrit71]

2. If folks wont pay for the paper, why do they think they'll pay for it online?

..idiots...Glad to see Murdoch losing money...

[SoCalDem]

3. Murdoch's aggressive buying spree, and now his insistence on pay-per-view

is an attempt to make the others step across that line with him.. I hope he fails miserably....but the ones with the most money, usually get their way, even if it takes a while :(

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Online journalism is not worthless, but Murdoch journalism is

and that's his problem. It's hard to think of any columnist that The Times has that would persuade people to pay (Matthew Paris is readable, but that's about it). The Sunday Times has Jeremy Clarkson, who's a reactionary prat, but popular; whether he's enough to get a significant number of people to pay, I don't know. The reporting is nothing special.

I suspect the papers (especially The Times) have kept their paper sales up (or, more accurately, not too far down) largely through people who just don't use the internet much (eg my parents, who've had it delivered since before Murdoch bought it). I don't think it will get many online subscribers. I think Murdoch will find the visitors he's gets now are mostly casual ones, who won't rate his papers enough to pay for them rather than using free ones.