New York Times To Begin Charging Online With “Metered System”

by Joe Coscarelli | 10:29 am, January 17th, 2010

» 6 comments

The New York Times is finally ready to start charging users for access to content online and the plan will be announced by Chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr. imminently, according to a report this morning by New York magazine’s Daily Intel. In a highly anticipated and not at all unexpected business move, the paper has decided on a “metered” payment plan, similar to the Financial Times, in which readers have access to some free content before a subscription is necessary, Gabriel Sherman is reporting.

Sherman’s breaking news exclusive continues, short on specifics but long on analysis and insider quotes:

One personal friend of Sulzberger said a final decision could come within days, and a senior newsroom source agreed, adding that the plan could be announced in a matter of weeks. (Apple’s tablet computer is rumored to launch on January 27, and sources speculate that Sulzberger will strike a content partnership for the new device, which could dovetail with the paid strategy.) It will likely be months before the Times actually begins to charge for content, perhaps sometime this spring. Executive Editor Bill Keller declined to comment. Times spokesperson Diane McNulty said: “We’ll announce a decision when we believe that we have crafted the best possible business approach. No details till then.”

For much more on the New York Times decision process in charging for online content, read the rest of Sherman’s report here.

Daily Intel, Gabriel Sherman, New York Magazine, New York Times, New York Times pay wall, New York Times Subscription

ChrisNH

This is excellent news, and I hope The Boston Globe does likewise. The effect here will be to reduce (probably by a lot) the number of people exposed to the Times’ unfettered Liberal bias. Political columnists there are privately seething, knowing that they will be preaching to a smaller choir. The unintended consequences of charging for content is that you drive readers away. Advertisers, too, will be able to push back because they will rightly claim that their messages are reaching fewer people.
schmoe

Interesting to see how they will do it? If they are stupid, like most content producers, than they will:

a) be noninclusive and charge separately for online, print, and mobile editions. Perhaps add some really stupid tiered system of where you can read up to 10 articles for one price, 20 for another price, and unlimited for some grossly, absurd price.

b) make a unnecessarily complicated, annoying, and non conventional interface, so that will forced you into the “NY Times experience” – classifieds on one side, and links to other ny articles, etc. All and don’t forget, search functionality that can’t anything.
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

@schmoe: FT allows anybody to read one article a month, free registrants can read up to ten (a month) and everything else requires a paid subscription.

@ChrisNH: In my opinion, one of the big reasons that TimesSelect failed was that it really only walled-off the columnists and nobody <I.needs to read them, so there was no incentive for people to register. While on the flipside, the columnists do help build the NYTimes brand an blogger links would be a good way for people to see the ‘most read’ and other linklists, so I wouldn’t really be surprised if opinion was completely excluded.

@NYTimes: if you price your tier reasonable enough, i would pay. Perhaps an example of “reasonable enough” is that I currently pay for access to a couple of papers, but they price their annual online subscription, the same as a month’s worth of hard-copy.

Oh and for the record, perhaps the only paid subscription that I completely dismissed without any consideration was the small town daily, who insisted that I also had to get the hardcopy mailed to me and that I couldn’t just donate it to their local library because the addresses wouldn’t be the same.
http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Guo/100000649950349 James Guo

charge is never a good news
iamelgringo

I’ve been reading a lot of financial and economic news as I’ve started http://Newsley.com. A lot of those sites tend to have registration walls (Financial Times) or pay walls (Barron’s, Wall Street Journal). And, those sites tend to do a bit better financially because of those limitations. Those are also niche markets who’s readers have a vested financial interest in staying on top of the news.

The Times is in a whole different market, however, and I’m not sure a lot of their readers are going to be willing to pay for access. I love the New York Times. I think their writing is superb. But, would I pay for access to their writing? Not really. I’ll find other sources of news. It’s supply and demand, and unfortunately, I think there is an oversupply of general news, and I’m afraid that the New York Times is going to take a bath on this one.
jennielynsan

This is remarkable of the foremost blogs in the field of teaching. If I don’t come in for a couple of days, there are so many posts that it’ll lead me a couple of hrs just to go all over whatever I missed!! Praises.

Thanks. great wonderful infos. here keep up Culinary Skills Egg Salad Recipe French Onion Soup Recipe the fabulous work. I cannot actually lead a more optimistic comment as i’m abit out of my deph but i will be checking back here for further updates.