One problem with this idea is the fact that it would limit the online share-ability of Times articles through blogs, Twitter, or Facebook links. So to tackle this problem, the NY Times has suggested that third-party links to their articles would still work as before. This may solve the linking problem, but institutes a new problem where readers can quickly bypass the pay wall by searching for the article on Google or Twitter.
Another problem that the Times hasn't addressed is the fact that this method, in effect, punishes their most loyal readers. In some ways it makes sense, but without offering this community additional perks or features, this may feel like a betrayal of their reading community.
Clearly, the New York Times is struggling with the best method to monetize their online readership without alienating them or limiting the ability to share Times articles. This is a difficult situation, and it will be interesting to see how much this new wall affects the Time's overall online readership.
I agree with the comment that this strategy punishes loyal readers and disincentivizes their participation. Rather, NYTimes should be considering how to reward and incentivize its readers to drive greater traffic to thier site. Perhaps, they could tie content sharing activities, like posting a link or writing reviews, to having further access to articles. There remains the issue of where to monetize and what customers to require a fee from. But perhaps a two-fold approach, pay a fee or perform some activity for us in order to get access, would help loyal readers feel better about the new fee structure. Then they can make a choice about how to pay with money or time.
ReplyDelete