Will You Be Willing To Pay For News?
by Tim Manni
The title of Frank Rich’s op-ed column in this weekend’s New York Times, “The American Press on Suicide Watch,” seems like it says it all; but does it? While acknowledging the current state of the industry, Rich doesn’t consider it a goner. Instead of completely reiterating the causes of the downfall, Rich steps back even further throughout history in order to make a case for the future.
Emerging technologies have always challenged the “purity” of existing forums. For example, Rich points out that the emergence of television in the late 1940’s was regarded as “a monster” capable of destroying the radio and entertainment industries. Furthermore, when the idea emerged some decades later that consumers should pay for television, free T.V. was considered an “inalienable American right”. Today it’s safe to say that nearly every American home has at least one television, and the majority of T.V. owners choose to pay for either cable or satellite T.V.
Enter the internet. The world-wide web has infiltrated thousands of businesses, mediums, and marketplaces. Free content and formats like blogs continue to tighten the nooses that are strangling print media. As the situation grows more dire, so does the discussion surrounding paying for quality news content.
Currently, the thought of having to pay for internet news has many disgustedly opposed (perhaps much in the same way Americans felt when they were told they’d have to pay for premium T.V.).
But Rich says paying may be the only way. Just as those unwilling to pay for cable are limited to roughly eight channels, the future may dictate that those unwilling to pay for digital news (from quality sources) will be limited to the interpretations of bloggers and other unofficial sources.
If you wish to view the in-depth, seemingly-over-saturating coverage provided by an entity like CNN, you have to pay a cable subscription. If you want live updates from the battlefront, critical and investigative reporting concerning the administration, if you simply want news you can trust, you might just have to pay for it.
Online advertising will never be enough to pay for the salaries, equipment, travel expenses, and all else that goes into producing quality news. While Rich’s proverbial “you get what you pay for” conclusion will certainly prove accurate, the real conclusion, which has been predicted yet remains undetermined, is “are you willing”.
If/when the time comes, will you be willing to pay to read online news?
The trend has already begun. Be sure to read “Micro-payments considered for WSJ website.”
