Paywalls: Newspaper's New Best Friend

Earlier this year, the New York Times set up a paywall to limit the number of free views people could have for their online articles. Many people believed this would be a complete failure thinking people would simply refuse to pay for online articles, but the New York Times has proved those non-believers wrong.

At the end of it's third quarter, released October 20, 20ll, the Times revealed a quarter of a million readers payed at least $15 to access the online content of this paper. This shows it is possible to make a profit by implementing the paywall strategy.

This is a huge success for now just the Times, but the journalism industry as a whole. Because the Times showed they could profit off their online content, it is expected that many other media outlets will follow their lead.

The success of the paywall helps ease the mind of those who believed newspapers to be a dying entity. Newspapers are not dying, they are simply evolving with the new technologies introduced to the world.

Although the paywall has the potential to benefit the journalism industry, what does this mean for readers? If other newspapers begin to charge for their online material, will readers still be able to access those breaking stories immediately? Or will this slow down the rate at which news travels?

The way in which the paywall strategy has been implemented by the Times will help keep casual readers interacting with the online content. The Times allows each person 20 views per month before they demand their payment. This allows those who are not news enthusiasts to view the few articles that catch their attention without first having to hand over their credit cards.

With it's success at the Times, it can be predicted that many other major news companies will set up paywalls similar to this one to help raise their profits. This will enable the journalism profession to keep up to speed with the fast paced world we now all live in.

photo by DRB62 from creativecommons.com

Read more...

No Joke, The Daily Show is News

Twenty-one percent of adults age 18-28 cite that the "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" is a place where they regularly learn presidential campaign news, but is "The Daily Show" reliable?

A study by Indiana University found that "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" is as accurate and newsworthy as traditional broadcast network newscasts, which includes ABC, CBS, and NBC.

Political jokes, including bashing Michele Bachmann for saying she is proud to be from the same city as a serial killer and joking over the meaning of Rick Santorum's name, present the news in an interesting way that keeps audiences engaged.

Although the first goal of "The Daily Show" is humor, there is still substance to the show. Stewart interviews substantial news makers such as the president of Pakistan and presidential candidates.

In 2002, news was made on the show by John Edwards announcing that he was going to run for president in 2004.

A second-by-second study of "The Daily Show" found that there is considerably more humor than substance in the show, but Stewart insists that he is a comedian, not a journalist.

It was noted that broadcast network news stories about the presidential elections are significantly shorter than are the stories featured on "The Daily Show" so the amount of substance per story is not different.

There is nothing wrong with being entertained while learning about current events. Without "The Daily Show" many people would not consume any news.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbXpD7bj5rg

Read more...