ViewPass just another paywall
Still tracking the trail of paywalls and other schemes for charging for content (mostly out of curiousity…sort of like watching a demolition derby), this explanation came to my attention from Chuck Peters.
The falacy of print news believing any form of a paywall (and, yes, ViewPass is just another form of a paywall) would provide long-term encouragment to consumers to fork over their money is so apparent. I won’t repeat myself here, but I will make the prediction that the average consumer will care no more or less about ViewPass as they would if newspaper made the collective decision to erect their own individual paywalls. Ladies and gentlemen, it is the exact same effect on the consumer – that being money out of their pocket for something that was free and, GASP!, will still be free on plenty of other non-newspaper sites. Call it what you want, band together like a bunch of dodo birds, but it is still a pay wall and it is short-sighted. Face it, the consumers have allies in this situation and they take the form of all the television news sites, the independent news sites (including some newspapers), and a host of new aggregation services. Your flanks are exposed and, no matter what you call your defensive tactics, your are already in enfilade. Doubt me? Ask the telephone companies about the measurable bit broadband telephone has taken out of their revenue pies and then ask yourself why the consumers have taken that path. Hint: believing your hold an audience hostage when you do not.
So, here it is – my prediction. A pay wall will go up and it might be called ViewPass or just Bill. It matters little because it will only go down in history as the self-chosen cyanide through which a large number of newspapers killed themselves.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=c0ebe4da-beb4-49bf-9cad-fee06b2ed5dd)
Steve Ribble 1022 on June 9, 2009 Permalink |
It sounds like there is no way to monetize the electronic distribution of information. It also seems that monetizing viewing of the information (advertising), cannot support a large overhead news gathering operation. So, is it possible to monetize the actual gathering of the information? If not, self-chosen cyanide might be mute. We will die of old age.
tomaltman 0135 on June 11, 2009 Permalink |
It’s funny, because when I first came into the newspaper business (radio transplant in 2000) I was always told the subscription rate was just enough to cover the distribution of the paper. So, one would conclude we could charge the cost of delivery of a digital product, but the consumer is already paying for that
But Mike, you’re right on – call it ViewPass, Subscription, or a Pineapple. It’s all the magic Kool-Aid.
Steve Buttry 0815 on June 13, 2009 Permalink |
Mike, I agree wholeheartedly on pay walls, which I have said loudly on my own blog. And Alan Mutter, who’s pushing ViewPass, said explicitly in his blog: “If you suddenly put a pay wall on a website that used to be free, you are bound to lose a substantial amount of traffic representing a considerable amount of potential advertising inventory. Once customers are turned off, it will be awfully hard to get most of them back, especially as plenty of free websites will be glad to welcome them.” He sees ViewPass as having value for premium content (which I see as barely a trickle) and collecting user data (which is important). The reason I see some value is that something like ViewPass, which is easily used on multiple sites, might be tremendously helpful for the transaction-based business model we need to develop. I think it’s worth exploring, with a huge dose of skepticism for the backward-thinking people who will try to use it for paywalls.
Photo flap reinforces my point « Roadies of the C3 0752 on August 3, 2009 Permalink |
[...] C3 Roadies blog on ViewPass being just another pay wall…nothing more, nothing less (6/9): http://c3it.wordpress.com/2009/06/09/viewpass-just-another-paywall/ [...]