On the same day that CNN officially admits it can make more money by flinging open the gates to video on CNN.com and making its content more valuable to advertisers, the New York Times opts to put some of its most visible content behind gates — and, in the process, narrow its audience considerably.
Despite the drama, the upshot is the same for both — and for the Wall Street Journal, among others, which has been looking for ways to reach outside the gates: hybrid models offer the most protection from cyclical revenues like advertising — and the greatest potential for return. But launching a premium product is no guarantee; just ask the folks at LATimes.com and the people who refused to pay for CalendarLive.
Rafat adds: As usual, overreaction from everyone on NYT’s move. At best, it is an experiment…unlike print, online offers so many ways to experiment with what you have. And NYT is doing that with this new move. While you can debate endlessly whether bundling columnists is the wisest strategy (I expected them to experiment creatively with different tiers within archives..not this.), to expect everyone to follow one and only one route is to defeat the whole purpose of this medium. One thing is clear: there are a million ways to slice and dice your content, and if NYT is trying to do that, more power to them, reactionaries be damned…
Related: Our coverage of NYT…
Subscriber content
?
Subscriber content comes from Gigaom Research, bridging the gap between breaking news and long-tail research. Visit any of our reports to learn more and subscribe.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments have been disabled for this post