Murdoch's problem with online content

Financial Times:

Rupert Murdoch has vowed to charge for all the online content of his newspapers and television news channels, going well beyond his prediction in May that the company would test pay models on one of its stronger papers within the year.

The comments by News Corp's chairman came as he predicted a "high single digit" rebound in the group's operating profits next year. The worst of the media sector slump might be behind the company, he said, as he reported "some good signs of life" in advertising.

...

The Guardian also reports on the decision:

Who made the rule that everything on the internet should be free? It's the question that beleaguered media executives around the world are have been muttering to themselves for months now.

The only certain answer is that it was none of them, because when the decisions about internet strategy were being made in their organisations, none of the most senior bosses were particularly interested.

Now, hit by the double whammy of a cyclical advertising downturn and huge structural change, the news business is going through the same pain that afflicted the music industry. After years of hoping the problem would go away, news organisations are desperately reaching for the same strategy adopted by the music bosses: shutting the paid-for door after the free horse has long since bolted.

...

His problem is that he has some of the worst online sites on the internet. The wizbang graphics that work on Fox News TV, don't on their internet site and the same goes for the NY Post site.

His sites are slow, tend to be on constant refresh and are a pain to navigate. CNN which can't really compete on cable news anymore knocks the socks off the Fox News web site with their own clean crisp presentation. The BBC also has a very clean quick site. Other sites like Politico have shown how to make money by offering their content without charge.

If he follows the Wall Street Journal model, he may be OK. The Journal still offers its opinion page without charge and it is one of the better resources on the net for political commentary. It also is not encumbered with all the frou-frou of the Fox News Channel and NY Post sites. If he becomes more restrictive, he is unlikely to produce the revenue to pay for those sites,

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more