I was pleasantly surprised to read the WSJ will be making more content free on it’s website. But was disappointed that they are still debating whether to make all of it free to the general public.
As you’ve heard me say before… in the age of the internet, where content travels without boundaries, the need to have free content keeps media publications at parity. Frankly, I love the WSJ… I read it everyday. But they are reporting the news, and I haven’t had any issue finding the exact same content or reporting on other web sites… so I as a reader don’t see any additional “benefit” by having to subscribe. If the content or analysis was so incredible or I received substantial increased benefit, I’d pay the money to subscribe.
The NYT made all of its content free at the end of last year, with the goal of driving its content throughout other sites… therefore increasing traffic back to NYT.com. That’s a smart play – with shifts occurring in how people consume media digitally, they’ve positioned themselves to take advantage of increased traffic while providing a long term advertising model.
Scott
NYT NYT.com WSJ WSJ.com content free interactive digital web traffic HP Hewlett Packard advertising media Scott Berg Newscorp
Information disclosed in this community becomes public.
Exercise caution when deciding to disclose your personal information.
HP reserves the right, but is not obligated to, edit or remove your comment if it contains personally identifiable information or other content HP deems unacceptable.
Opinions expressed are your personal opinions or those of the original authors, and not of HP.
Please see HP's web Terms of Use for more details.
