Too big to fail?

For years,most newspapers have offered an embarrassment of riches on their websites,freely available to anyone. This was seen as a capitulation to the iron law that people will not pay for news any more when its abundantly available,streaming in from many sources.

Many,many media outlets have tried and failed to make the classic subscription model work. According to Chris Anderson,author of Free: the Future of a Radical Price, the huge psychological gap between almost zero and zero is why micropayments failed. But journalism comes with a certain value,information also wants to be coveted and paid for,and news organisations have been experimenting with different ways to monetise the business. Some have tried offering different tiers,like a free version and a pro version the freemium model. Others dangle an abundance of archived goodies before you,

and ask for a subscription. Rupert Murdoch,of course,has led the campaign to make people shell out for the news. Subscription reportedly works for The Wall Street Journal,with its specialised content and its affluent readership. It has also worked for highbrow niche journals,and people are now used to paying for apps. Can general-interest newspapers like The Times,London,also owned by Murdoch,or The New York Times try the same tack?

As The New York Times launches its new and nuanced metered model,it will put the newspaper industry on trial once again. Whether or not this particular model wins out,its a reminder that news shouldnt necessarily be a not-for-profit venture in the digital world.