How much would you pay to read this blog?

By Graeme Whitfield on Aug 6, 09 02:17 PM

Not much, I would reckon, particularly as it's been free for the last 18 months.

I ask because Rupert Murdoch has announced this morning that he is soon going to charge for access to his news websites, including the sites of The Sun, News of the World and the Times.

Would you pay for news on the net? I'd be surprised if you would when there are so many other sources of news online that you can get for free.

Murdoch's stance is that there is a cost to producing news and giving it away doesn't make economic sense. Web advertising isn't bringing in that much cash - not least because a huge percentage of the online spend goes to Google and other search engines - so the gap has to be plugged somehow.

He's not the only one to think this way - David Simon, former journalist and creator of the greatest TV series ever, The Wire, agrees - but he's certainly the highest profile media figure to make this stance. There's every possibility that other media groups will follow him and people are saying that the era of free news could come to an end.

It's never a great idea to bet against Murdoch, but the problem he'll have is that there is no copyright in news. You can copyright pictures and the way it is written, but you can't really stop people copying your stories if they re-write them.

If News International shut down access to their sites, people will in all likelihood go to their competitors. Even if every major news organisation joined his stance, there's nothing to stop small operators setting up their own news sites. Added to that, there's also the spectre of the BBC to take into account, which will always offer a pretty good news service for nowt.

Still, it's an interesting stance and it will be fun to see how things pan out over the next 18 months or so. My guess is that you can't put the genie back into the bottle, but if you want to send me ÃÂ£1.50 for reading this blog, feel free.

Comments (2)

Older/Newer

« Plot of Bother: Aug 4 | Does there have to be an ANEC? »

2 Comments

Paul Linford said:

Added to that, there's also the spectre of the BBC to take into account, which will always offer a pretty good news service for nowt.

Maybe not, Graeme, if Murdoch and Co manage to persuade the next government that the BBC's online activity is essentially anti-competitive.

If so, it certainly wouldn't be the first time Murdoch had persuaded ministers to change the rules for his benefit - he wouldn't even have been allowed to buy The Times in 1981 had Mrs Thatcher not decided to wave the deal through without a reference to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission.

August 7, 2009 4:50 PM

Malco said:

But would you consider using donation micropayments instead? Its an old idea, but given volume may catch on.

August 18, 2009 10:02 PM

Name

Email Address

URL

Remember personal info?

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)

Captcha:

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

This is to help prevent spamming and confirm you are a human

Professor Paul Younger - on a Newcastle University project harnessing the city's geothermal energy
My postings | My feed

Will in Whitehall - The Journal's Political Editor on life at Westminster
My postings | My feed | Twitter

Nicola Weatherall - Education Reporter Nicola Weatherall's is training for the London Marathon.
My postings | My feed

Brenda Boyd - the life and times of a morris dancer
My postings | My feed

Hannah Davies - on family matters
My postings | My feed

Write Said Fred - A view of the world from three feet
My postings | My feed

Adrian Pearson - The Journal's Regional Affairs Correspondent with a look behind the scenes of North East politics
My postings | My feed | Twitter