The Next Web

Why Rupert Murdoch’s corporate suicide will be great for bloggers

By Martin Bryant
August 7, 2009
• Tweet This
• Tip Techmeme
• Submit to Hackernews

Share


Comments

Rupert MurdochNews broke this week that Rupert Murdoch plans to charge for access to all his newspaper websites within the next year.

The News International mogul, who owns a wide range of newspapers around the world from the highbrow Wall Street Journal to the mass-market Sun, has declared that “Quality journalism costs money” and that the days of free access to news sites needs to be over if the long-term future of news organisations is to be guaranteed.

The Guardian reports that the testing ground for this new approach will be Britain’s The Times and Sunday Times titles. They will disappear behind a paywall from November this year with Murdoch’s other UK titles following by June 2010. While the details of pricing have yet to be revealed, two things are clear:

  1. Traditional news organisations definitely need charge for content if they are to survive. Charging for a paper version when people can read the same stories for free online isn’t going to work in the long-term.
  2. When news organisations start charging they’re doomed. People are so used to getting news online for free that they’ll simply move elsewhere to get their news.

So, it’s a case of ‘Work for free and die’ or ‘Charge and probably die’. Given the choice, Murdoch has opted to at least try to survive. With Murdoch taking the lead, other news organisations will probably follow suit and disappear behind paywalls too. Some outlets, like BBC News are funded in a way that will allow them to continue to be free but they can’t provide the wide range of stories and perspectives that access to every news site offers.

If most traditional news sources start charging, where will we all get our news? Sure, some people will pay but the great thing about online news is that it can be shared easily. Paywalls kill that sharing as only people fellow subscribers will be able to read the shared stories. We can only hope for his sake that Murdoch realises this and has allowed for some sharing of news. After all, how are we supposed to know if something is worth paying for if we only have a headline?

The upshot of this huge change is that the role of blogger will be increasingly important. Disseminating and discussing current affairs news is an important role for bloggers already. All it will take is for a handful of bloggers to buy subscriptions to news sites, rehash the news in their own posts and then no-one else will need to bother paying for the news.

Then there are all the journalists who have been made redundant from cost-cutting news organisations. Many of them will use their new-found independence and professional skills to seek out stories without the need for a corporate paymaster. Initiatives like the Huffington Post Investigative Fund will help foot the bill for original investigative journalism outside traditional news organisations.

In short – while traditional newsmakers are at death’s door the future’s rosy for bloggers and independent media.


  • Stephen Walker
    Totally wrong move. Murdoch obviously didn't get that mass media news are a commodity in the age of the Internet. Unless Murdoch owns all news agencies and all blogs around the world, his "quality" online newspapers will simply be ignored once he starts charging for online access. Bye bye Murdoch empire. I won't cry.
  • I think he just killed any chance his outlets had of getting shared, bookmarked, retweeted, quoted, etc. I can't think of a worse distribution model for a medium that's already in trouble of reaching people.
  • I am not yet sure if people won't pay for this content. I think it depends very much on the magazine or newspaper. I would for some titles. But it must be quality content, of course.

    But overall there is change in the air and bloggers will play an increasingly important role in the years to come.
  • NMN
    What is it with all these news companies trying to charge us for their news? If people can't get it from them, there will always be another source. Good post, btw. http://AppUseful.com
  • Dave
    That's true, the death of the American newspaper brings power to the people(!), empowering them to write great stories like this one: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/07/robert...
  • Doc Holiday
    I must agree. His old school insanity to hit the trenches, means his empire will die in the trenches. Sort of like a self induced burial.

    Murdope's senility is a blessing in this case.
  • Murdoch is a savvy guy. He's been there and seen it. He not just survived the first wave of the internet when people predicted that he would go the way of he dinosaurs, he flourished.

    Are you so sure that there are an army of qualified good news writers who are willing to investigate leads and chase down stories or fly to the ends of the earth and sit in war-zones, or who know how to check facts. And are they all going to do it for free instead of just ripping off the content of News Ltds people?

    Do the bloggers have the reputation for quality? Does the mass market trust them as a source?

    People pay for the FT and other news now. Why wouldn't they pay for the Sunday Times online?
  • Wagner
    Truth is, we're in a transitional period. The Media business model is trying to adapt, thus charging for content as they believe it is the solution.
    At first some people will pay, but it won't be enough because people won't pay enough to substitute ads as they are trying to do.

    I'd bet that in the near future the hard to get/investigative news will be paid, but not in a subscription model. You'll pay for either a niche journalism (i.e. financial as you rightly pointed out FT) or specific subjects.
  • FT.com just announced that they are going to 1-click transactions allowing pay-per-view starting summer 2010.

    The good news is that when big media funds the development of a 1-click transaction system, it will be available to bloggers and other independent content creators. The opportunity to compete for dollars directly from consumers will create a much more level playing field than the FREE/ad supported business model.

    Furthermore, with big media "retailing" their product, the value of links from the Long Tail creators will increase exponentially. Therefore, Big Media will provide a quid pro quo - affiliate fees, content licensing credits, subscription credits, etc.

    This is a game-changing moment that will lead to new opportunity.

    katherine (at) comradity.com
  • Wagner
    If “Quality journalism costs money” holds true, he should be paying people to read The Sun...
  • Look at french paper Le Monde - it's 6 euros per month to get access to full content and archives - you pay per month and you may unsubscribe at any moment at no cost.
  • Unreal. Personaly I dont pay for content I interest
blog comments powered by Disqus
 


TwitterCounter