Despite the buzz on paid content, subscription sites and micro-payments, the idea that putting up pay walls and toll booths to save newspapers seems destined to only hasten the erosion of community relevance for newspapers. If the newspaper industry were Twitter, going to paid content most certainly would be a "Fail Whale" moment. But unlike Twitter all would not be well in just a few minutes.
Many editors seem to be having second thoughts about the industry's practice of giving away stories and photos on their Web sites. Twenty-eight percent of the respondents said they plan to charge for online content. About 20 percent said they will offer some coverage exclusively in their print editions to reward their paying customers.-- AP story on APME editor survey
; "News Sentinel newsroom VCC")
; "Howard Finberg")
; "Larry Kramer")
; "Pizza Kitchen story")
; "ONA")
; "Google at 11")
; "Rusty Coats at KSMA")
; "Ike Pigott")
; "SEC/Twittering")
; "Wes Rucker Twittering")
Telling: "to reward their paying customers." Those editors need to check back. The customers are paying, but not many are paying more than the cost of production and delivery, and if you hiked the subscription price they would drop the paper like a hot rock. Charge them something closer to the actual cost of producing the content, printing the paper and distributing it. Heck, charge them just half the actual cost. Anyone who's willing to pay that deserves to be rewarded.