The debate over whether digital news content should attract the same prices as printed news is highly topical and heated debate. I can understand why it is that certain news corporations want consumers to pay for the news they provide, but I don't think it's a realistic option. As the article by Steve Busfield in The Guardian explains, society is shifting and adapting to the new forms of technology, and none of their expectations is that news institutions will provide the news they require in a digital form, and preferably for no extra cost. Interestingly, the comments posted by general members of the pubic at the end of both articles demonstrate this notion, with one reader saying "when I reach my limit on free articles, I'll simply stop surfing". Counter to this of course are those who sympathize with those involved in the industry who are trying to make a living out of the news. Unfortunately though, I feel modern society has become so used to accessing free content via online platforms that they will generally resist the concept of pay-per-view news content.
This then begs the question, who will pay to keep the news afloat? Can online news sources survive on the revenue generated by advertisers? (Who the public seem even more reluctant to deal with online than in print) Or are we able to treat printed news and digital news as separate entities, just like books and e-books are considered to be different? Or, as another alternative, could online news simply become a forum in which the headlines/outlines of a story are made, and the print news be the location of the full, in-depth article? Surely publications like mx newspapers have demonstrated that a news service can provide free news to it's customers.
One of the readers of the New York Times article made the interesting point that the aspects of digital news that most people wanted to access (e.g. Breaking news, entertainment news and sport) be free, but make niche services specific to news sites, such as crosswords or classifieds, areas in which consumers need to pay. This could allow for news corporations to make money whilst still providing the service that everyone wants for free.
I think that devoted supporters of news institutions will continue to pay for their regardless of what sort of digital form their provider takes. Besides, aren't all those people who casually flick through newspapers and magazines without buying them doing the same thing as those who browse online news for free? I don't see the news industry mounting an attack on them!
No comments:
Post a Comment