Why Micropayments Won't Work for the NYT

February 10, 2009 at 12:01 am PT

I’m not sure why the micropayments-as-the-savior-of-journalism meme seems to have taken off of late, but I’m glad there are lots of people trying to squash it: I’d particularly recommend Gabe Sherman and Clay Shirky. But in the case of Steve Brill’s “secret memo” on the subject, it’s worth responding to some of his specifics; a few points are worth making beyond those of David Cay Johnston.

First, Brill frames the question in an utterly bizarre manner, through the parent of a journalism student:

As one parent put it to me last fall, “Why are you luring my daughter into something that will never pay her loans when she could go to work for McKinsey?” I have been trying to construct an answer for her.

The answer is simple: “Madam, if your daughter wants to go work for McKinsey, she’s more than welcome to.” You want to make lots of money? Don’t become a journalist. In fact, if you’re the kind of person who would make a great management consultant, don’t become a journalist: The skillsets are just too different.

Read the rest of this post

Tagged with: advertising, Clay Shirky, Conde Nast Portfolio, David Cay Johnston, Daylife, Felix Salmon, Gabe Sherman, Google, Guardian, Internet, journalism, McKinsey, micropayments, newspaper, Reuters, Steve Brill, The New York Times, TV

comments so far. Add yours.

  • Alan Jacobson

    Talk about behind the Times! Micropayments won’t work for NYT or Time magazine.

    Time’s “Modest Proposal” to save newspapers is delivered in a form that is remarkably modest itself – its 56 pages are barely thick enough to shim a coffee table, let alone support an entire industry.

    Time may be girded in gravitas, but its physical presence lacks heft. The pot is calling the kettle black while newspapers and magazines head into the red.

    Newspapers may want to fight back, but against whom? Craig Newmark, the guy who reinvented classifieds, or Al Gore, the guy who invented the Internet?

    A recent commenter on Alan Mutter’s superb blog said, “The problem with media companies is that they don’t know how to build a successful website from scratch. Very few newspaper and local media companies have successfully established new web enterprises that weren’t leveraging their local brands.”

    Mutter calls this failure “profound.” Furthermore, he says:

    “The reason young people don’t gravitate to newspaper websites is that most sites are more newspaper than web: staid, static and largely un-interactive. In other words, 1995-style shovelware won’t cut it.”

    While Mutter delivers answers, Jeff Jarvis asks “What Would Google Do?” Based on Jarvis’ book, it’s safe to assume that Google would not deploy the kind of lackluster sites that Jarvis directed for Newhouse’s newspapers until 2005, where he was president and creative director. Ultimately, it’s these people who are responsible for the failure of newspapers to monetize online, which ultimately is driving the downfall of newspapers.

    Here’s something else Google wouldn’t do: create new sites mired in old thinking. Globalpost, minnpost, voiceofsandiego and stlbeacon will fail because they merely replicate the content and revenue strategies that haven’t worked for newspapers. None of these can generate the cash they need to be sustainable. That’s why they depend upon handouts.

    But consider this:

    realpeoplerealstuff, videojobshop and tweentribune are launching in March with the support of major American newspapers. These sites represent the new breed of news and advertising sites. They embody the new fundamentals: niche, youth, usability, UGC, geo- and demographically targeted advertising, stickiness, video, automation, mobile, distributive editing and fun.

    These sites are coming to your town – with or without the local newspaper’s imprimatur. But they’re coming.

    So go ahead. Pick up the current issue of Time. Its slimness speaks volumes.

    Permalink: http://www.brasstacksdesign.com/bell_tolls_for_time_too.htm

  • http://www.famebook.com Jan Simmonds

    Apart from referring to previous blogs posts/ comments at http://famebook.typepad.com on this subject, I just wanted to try and look at this from a different and objective perspective, which is what I think has been missing from the debate:

    Firstly, who says Google is always going to be the front window to all information…or any of the other names in the search environment either? I currently use iGoogle to amalgamate all my ‘feeds’ and bookmarks, but I was talking to one of our Famebook teccy’s the other day and he has simply designed his own ‘homepage’, which is I imagine, if not now then soon, an option many might pursue from a seemingly impartial provider (as a download or service). At that point, Google or whoever simply become just a small search button in the corner!

    Secondly this isn’t really about monetising individual content items, as much as it is new and existing brands ring fencing their own quality environments and creating their own value for it by relevance and traction. You only have to look at the brilliant Samir’s Glam Media or gradually the WSJ to see it can be done right or conversely to some of the world’s other most revered newspaper brands who have let Google permeate their front pages and/ or business models and whose best efforts to sustain their core values have been to contract out their ad sales on a CPM basis via third parties.

    In my opinion, the future will actually be about being the de facto destinations for types of content via a ‘single window provider’ and instead of the catastrophic effect of trying to charge to see the horse, when it has already bolted…which is what newspapers are doing, they need to be focusing on the roots of their industry…exclusive stories, focused articles, celebrity content etc. etc. I am certain that advertisers of household name brands will be equally glad of an opportunity to work their ad budgets within elegant environments and pay accordingly, as much as Google and Facebook and all the others alike, are equally totally incapable of offering one themselves!

    As those that know us are well aware, that’s what we are working towards!

  • http://www.famebook.com Jan Simmonds

    I just posted the above and then spotted Walt’s piece on Foxmark’s. Rushing with enthusiasm to check it out…http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20.....-your-pcs/

About Voices

This is a section of the AllThingsD Web site featuring posts that have been curated from around the Web: pieces we’ve read, discussions we’ve followed, stuff we like. Five posts are included here each weekday, but only the headline and the first two sentences. We link to the original site for the rest. The section is explicitly labeled, so it’s clear that content comes “from other Web sites.”

We also solicit original full-length posts and accept some unsolicited submissions. Voices is edited by Beth Callaghan.

Dive Into Media

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »

Apple to Announce iPad 3 First Week in March

John Paczkowski in Mobile

Can’t Buy Me Love … But You Can Buy Me Gadgets

Lauren Goode in Commerce

LinkedIn Is Acquiring Contacts Start-Up Rapportive

Liz Gannes in Social

View all today’s news »