The New York Times Commits Suicide

January 20th, 2010 (12) Posted By Erik Wong.

New York Times Pay Wall

NEW YORK (AP) – The New York Times says it will charge readers for full access to its Web site starting in 2011, a risky move aimed at drawing more revenue online without driving away advertisers that want the biggest possible audience.

The potential pitfalls have made most other major newspapers hesitant to take a similar step. But after months of deliberation, the Times said Wednesday it will use a metered system, allowing free access to a certain number of articles and then charging users for additional content.

Shares in The New York Times Co. fell 4 percent in afternoon trading.

The Times did not disclose how many articles will be available for free or what it will charge to read more. Subscribers to the printed version of the Times would still have free access to the Web site.

It would not be the first time the newspaper has asked readers to pay for its online articles.

It charged for its Web site in 1996 but attracted only about 4,000 subscribers. Another experiment called Times Select, which required a $50 annual subscription to read Times columnists, drew 221,000 customers but was scrapped in 2007 because it dented ad sales. Advertisers generally pay more for higher Web traffic.

The goal of a metered system is to draw casual readers with free articles while getting fees from people who want to go deeper on the site.

The plan would not stop search engines from cataloging the newspaper’s Web site, so its articles could still benefit from the traffic generated by search results.

The Times said it will use 2010 to build a new online infrastructure for charging readers on different platforms, not just personal computers. For instance, the newspaper can be read for free through an application on Apple’s iPhone. But the Times did not specify its plans for mobile editions.

In a statement, New York Times Co. CEO Janet Robinson said the company is “guided by the fact that our news and information are being featured in an increasingly broad range of end-user devices and services, and our pricing plans and policies must reflect this vision.”

The push for subscription revenue is happening because online advertising hasn’t grown enough to offset declines in print ads. The recession brought on a painful slump in ad spending as publishers were already facing new competition on the Web.

Overall advertising revenue fell nearly 30 percent in the first nine months of 2009 for the Times Co.’s business unit that includes the Times, the International Herald Tribune and their Web sites. The company reports fourth-quarter results Feb. 10.

One of the Times’ biggest rivals, The Wall Street Journal, already charges for access to its site. Rupert Murdoch, chairman of the Journal’s owner, News Corp., has vowed to impose a similar system at the company’s other titles, which include The Times of London and the New York Post.

The New York Times is contemplating a different approach than the Journal, however. On the Journal’s Web site, some articles are free to anyone, and some require a subscription.

The Times’ site would function more like the one run by The Financial Times. The London-based newspaper allows anyone to view one free article per month, and people who register on the site can get 10 free articles per month. Subscribers who pay $186 a year get access to most material on the site. A premium subscription for $299 comes with extra material. Or for $397 a year, FT subscribers can get the printed newspaper and read the Web site.

Rob Grimshaw, the managing director of FT.com, said the site has struck a successful balance between ad revenue and subscription fees. He said the newspaper has roughly 121,000 people who subscribe exclusively to its digital edition, up 22 percent from a year ago. By comparison, the print edition has about 400,000 subscribers.

And though he did not disclose specific figures on ad revenue, he said the newspaper makes up for the loss of advertising volume by charging each advertiser more. It can get this premium, he said, because FT.com knows more than other online destinations about its users and their interests.

Jihadi Killer Radio Hour
Follow Pat on Twitter
  • SlimReed

    Once something is gotten for free, people are reluctant to start buying it. The FT and WSJ have charged from the beginning, but the Times and other geniuses of journalism business thought the FT and WSJ were stupid, and then rushed to show how trendy they were. Each of them–those that give away their news–wanted to show their shareholders how the new business paradigm of the web would produce a cascade of new revenue through free access to their papers. What happened is that the man behind the curtain was exposed, and people all over discovered there was no news in the newspaper; everyone just copied AP copy. Consequently, readership of the hardcopy declined, along with ad revenue (which pays for production, lights, jobs, taxes, toilet paper, etc., etc.) because they gave away the paper for free. And then the cascades of new web revenue never appeared. FT and WSJ are still the only major publications increasing readership of their hardcopy, and they charge to read the paper online. Good luck to the times and others as they try to get folks to pay for news they can get anywhere for free.

  • Sully

    I look forward to their obituary.

    • MohammedSucksHogCock

      If the NYT committed suicide, then I would never hear from them again.

      Bad headline!

  • josephus

    Idiots.
    They need to pour all their efforts and “newsgathering” … they don’t really newsgather, they just spew liberal BS all day it’s not even journalism as we used to know it…machine into a real-time, breaking news, digital behemoth.
    They should ditch the print editions entirely. Fire the union based press operators and truck drivers and downsize into an electronic entity.
    If they insist on printing something on paper, it should be portable, feature content that supports the website, not the other way around.
    BTW, this applies for ALL NEWSPAPERS. Not just this progressive fish wrapper.
    None of them get it. That’s what astounds me. Not one single newspaper has gotten its peanut-sized brain around this.

  • ZenDraken

    Leftists never did understand supply and demand curves.

  • mark gibbons

    i hope they take the boston globe with them to that hole in the ground.

  • EL GONZO

    The New York “RAN OUT OF” Times….. another rag from the communist era vanishes. Let’s make sure Obama doesn’t do the same for our Constitution.

  • libertarian

    I wonder if Uncle Sambo is gonna bail them out too :?:

  • ji

    I will pay if you have something worth reading.
    Times is lib garbage, not worth even glancing at.

  • The Sentinel at the Gate

    Here’s to the demise of the New York Pravda! May your building burn to the ground on the day the doors are closed. May your news team never find employment and are forced to become subway people scrawling graffiti on the walls of the subway, wishing for readership. May your children be condemned to a life of begging and your wives fall on the third rail.

  • Tom in CO

    Bye bye Slimes!

  • http://eartlink@net nomee1

    :lol: ONE of the worst papers ever, now their gone :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: