AfterDawn: Tech news

Consumers say no thanks to paid web content

Written by Rich Fiscus (Google+) @ 18 Feb 2010 8:20 User comments (14)

Consumers say no thanks to paid web content According to a new report from The Nielsen Group, most people aren't willing to pay for the online content they get for free now.
At first glance the report looks favorable for proponents of locking content behind paywalls. More than 40% of the 27,000 survey respondents in 52 countries said they either have paid for or would consider paying for newspaper content online. About 35% indicated said the same about online (music) radio.

But The Devil is in the details. When it comes to paying for content the most important detail seems to be quality.

More than 70% of people surveyed indicated they would only pay for content if it's better than what they currently get for free. More than 60% would expect the freedom to copy, share or otherwise use paid content in whatever way they choose.

This would seem to be at odds with what's actually being proposed in the entertainment and news industries.

News providers who favor paywalls routinely bully people for daring to copy short passages from their articles. Even when it's clearly fair use.

TV executives who favor charging for online video don't even want viewers watching their officially approved streams (including ads) using a program like Boxee or a game console like the PS3.

Clearly if they want to charge for content it will have to be something new. But that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone - except news and entertainment executive unfortunately.

Previous Next  

14 user comments

118.2.2010 12:38

Quote:
More than 70% of people surveyed indicated they would only pay for content if it's better than what they currently get for free
I agree, offering free basic content then charging for premium content (of higher quality and/or extra features) is the way to go.

Quote:
More than 60% would expect the freedom to copy, share or otherwise use paid content in whatever way they choose.

Charging extra for this type of the feature seems like a good idea.

For everyone else who won't buy into this type of subscription plan, will continue to get their media by other means, or be satisfied with the free content that is available.

218.2.2010 13:49

Newspapers: Just one more category to be added on bit torrent sites.

318.2.2010 14:17

We're talking about news here, right? What is a an extra,"premium content" that would justify extra cost? The news is news, the only way I'd pay extra if would make me breakfast in the morning and read it for me too...
What is "the premium content"? Is "regular news" free, and then if you want the "truth" you'd have to pay for it? Or would the free content be limited to news like "so and so celebrity goes to rehab again", and the premium content would be issues that actually merit spending a few minutes to read about?



Piss me off, and I Will ignore You!

418.2.2010 14:19

"online content"
How much of the content is porn?

519.2.2010 8:38

Greedy corporations can thankfully only dream of an Internet where we pay for access to everything.

619.2.2010 15:21

Yeah, I'm going to PAY you to propagandize to me, and ENCOURAGE you to continue to filter out anything you don't want me to know.

FAT F*N CHANCE!

719.2.2010 15:26

Originally posted by avoidz:
Greedy corporations can thankfully only dream of an Internet where we pay for access to everything.
Look up "internet drivers license". This is EXACTLY where we're going, and to publish or consume content, your friendly neighborhood federal agent will have to authorize you, and punish you if you step out of line.

819.2.2010 15:59

Newspapers are going out of business because most people prefer to use free news on tap. Then they can look for news they are interested in when they want to.

Staying in business is not being greedy. Some one gaithers the news and they want to be paid.

919.2.2010 16:04

Originally posted by Mez:
Newspapers are going out of business because most people prefer to use free news on tap. Then they can look for news they are interested in when they want to.

Staying in business is not being greedy. Some one gaithers the news and they want to be paid.
Yeah, and don't forget the clearly political intent of all the news we're so graciously allowed to consume. Even Russia is laughing at the blatant propaganda sold to us as news, knowing that even with the iron curtain up, they got more accurate information.

1019.2.2010 18:17

Originally posted by cyprusrom:
We're talking about news here, right? What is a an extra,"premium content" that would justify extra cost? The news is news, the only way I'd pay extra if would make me breakfast in the morning and read it for me too...
What is "the premium content"? Is "regular news" free, and then if you want the "truth" you'd have to pay for it? Or would the free content be limited to news like "so and so celebrity goes to rehab again", and the premium content would be issues that actually merit spending a few minutes to read about?
You'd pay to read articles by columnists. Sure you can get the basic news easily enough but many people like opinion pieces. Fox News is #1 for this exact reason. The whole station is just one opinion show after the other.

1119.2.2010 18:33

Let me give you an example of why content providers are hurting.... I used to buy our newspaper 3 or 4 times a week.. at the newsstand.. then starting in 2008, the price of the weekday paper went from .50 cents to a dollar and the sunday went from 1.50 to 2.00.. Then 6 months later, the sunday went to 3.00 .. and ever so often they raise the weekday paper another .50 cents but you never know when.. That is just crazy.. so I wonder just how much the sales went down.. and then they blame that on the "internet"?... how funny...(oh i live in Dallas by the way)

1219.2.2010 20:45

I on the other hand will never pay for news content. In fact I hate news content as it has no value to me. I do not care what is happening over here or there, and most of the things I need to know are not news related. If I want information I buy a book and read it. If I want to watch a movie I buy it. News and news related content, has little value. The only portion of a daily paper worth anything is the stock section and if you trade you have access to that anyway.

and to slickwill are you being serious, you would pay extra to cut and paste? Whats next am I going to have to pay extra to reference a book in an academic paper? Or maybe we could charge for food by the bite?

1320.2.2010 7:58

I don't work for this company, but here's a free/or paid forum and website for people who use Windoze OS. Cnet authors and such. I've subscribed to them for years. If you're tech inclined or just interested in Windoze- http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/index.php?showtopic=772166 for the lounge. http://windowssecrets.com/ for the website. You may want to check them out. IS THIS OFF-SUBJECT?

1420.2.2010 9:29

Was just introduced to this site last week. still haven't browsed it though. Looks interesting. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnew...ecta/index.html

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive