Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Serial meets The X-Files in Limetown, a fictional podcast drawing raves after just one episode
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
Sept. 9, 2009, 5:20 p.m.

Google developing a micropayment platform and pitching newspapers: “‘Open’ need not mean free”

Google is developing a micropayment platform that will be “available to both Google and non-Google properties within the next year,” according to a document the company submitted to the Newspaper Association of America. The system, an extension of Google Checkout, would be a new and unexpected option for the news industry as it considers how to charge for content online.

The revelation comes in an eight-page response to the NAA’s request for paid-content proposals, which it extended to several major technology companies and startups. It’s surprising, given the newspaper industry’s tenuous relationship with Google, that the company was involved at all.

In the document, which you can download here, Google outlines its “vision of a premium content ecosystem” that includes subscriptions across multiple news sites, syndication on third-party sites, accessibility to search, and various payment options, including small fees for access to individual pieces of content (known as micropayments). The company says:

Google believes that an open web benefits all users and publishers. However, “open” need not mean free. We believe that content on the Internet can thrive supported by multiple business models — including content available only via subscription.

Google describes its new e-commerce plans as “in production” and “currently in the early planning stages.” The company says that Google Checkout is currently equipped to handle subscription payments for news sites but describes the process for merchants as “fairly rudimentary” and says the system “could be improved to be more relevant for news and media companies.” The description of Google’s micropayment system is more intriguing:

While currently in the early planning stages, micropayments will be a payment vehicle available to both Google and non-Google properties within the next year. The idea is to allow viable payments of a penny to several dollars by aggregating purchases across merchants and over time. Google will mitigate the risk of non-payment by assigning credit limits based on past purchasing behavior and having credit card instruments on file for those with higher credit limits and using our proprietary risk engines to track abuse or fraud. Merchant integration will be extremely simple. [emphasis theirs]

Transaction costs, including credit card fees, are a major hindrance to micropayment plans under consideration by the news industry, which is why Google’s proposal could be appealing. Of course, newspaper companies that have frequently accused Google of leaching off their revenue might be loathe to participate in a joint venture.

In a brief paragraph entitled “business model,” Google suggests that it would share revenue in a similar fashion to the iTunes App Store and its own Android Market, both of which take a 30% cut of revenue. But while these plans are emerging from Google’s communication with the NAA, the micropayment system is likely to have bigger implications outside of the news industry. In the same document, Google douses some cold water on micropayments for news: “We do not believe it will be the norm for accessing content.”

Google Checkout has longed been discussed as a potential micropayment platform and competitor to eBay’s far more successful PayPal. Google applied for a patent on a micropayment system in 2004; on page 7 of the application, Google mentions that “a seller of web-based electronic content, such as newspaper stories, typically has a purchasing system that is valid for only the website providing the content.” A crudely drawn diagram describes Google’s proposed alternative:

Google’s document for the NAA also discusses publishers syndicating their content on third-party sites and sharing ad revenue, which sounds like what the Fair Syndication Consortium is proposing. There are also a few paid-content scenarios that are worth checking out, including:

We envision the typical scenario to be where a user pays a monthly fee for access to a wide-ranging package of premium content. One example of a “package” might be full access to the WSJ [Wall Street Journal]; another “package” might include the top 10 business publications. Google believes that there is real power and benefit to publishers in providing these sorts of broad, multi-publication access passes.

I’m waiting on comment from Google. UPDATE, 5:21 p.m.: Here it is:

The Newspaper Association of America asked Google to submit some ideas for how they could use technology to generate more revenue from their digital content, and we shared some of those ideas in this proposal. It’s consistent with Google’s effort to help publishers reach bigger audiences, better engage their readers and make more money. We have always said that publishers have full control over their content. If they decide to charge for it, we’ll work with them to ensure that their content can be easily discovered if they want it to be. As for Checkout, we don’t have any specific new services to announce but we’re always looking for ways to make payments online more efficient and user-friendly.

There’s much more to explore in the NAA’s report, which was produced by a task force of newspaper executives charged to explore “platforms for monetizing digital content.” (The committee was formed after the NAA’s secretive meeting in Chicago last spring.) I’ll update with more as I get to it, but if you see anything good, feel free to drop it in the comments or contact me by email.

Here’s the document that Google submitted to the NAA:

POSTED     Sept. 9, 2009, 5:20 p.m.
SHARE THIS STORY
   
Show comments  
Show tags
 
Join the 15,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Serial meets The X-Files in Limetown, a fictional podcast drawing raves after just one episode
“Serial had to stay nonfictional. At the end of the show, it didn’t necessarily mean that it had a conclusion. That’s the biggest advantage we have: We’re making it up. So we can give you an ending.”
The Atlantic is returning to blogging
“We missed the kind of writing it represents. We missed the kind of audience engagement it represents.”
The mourning of AJR is less about a decline in press criticism than the loss of an institution
Like the media it covers, journalism criticism has moved from the work of a few established institutions to something more diffuse.
What to read next
2351
tweets
The New York Times built a Slack bot to help decide which stories to post to social media
The bot, named Blossom, helps predict how stories will do on social and also suggests which stories editors should promote.
1287Jo Ellen Green Kaiser: Do independent news outlets have a blind spot when it comes to ethnic media?
The head of the Media Consortium argues that, by defining themselves in opposition to mainstream media, independent progressive outlets miss out on the power of ethnic and community journalism.
1029Newsonomics: 10 numbers on The New York Times’ 1 million digital-subscriber milestone
Digital subscribers are proving to be the bedrock of the Times’ business model going forward. How much more room is there for growth — and at what price points?
These stories are our most popular on Twitter over the past 30 days.
See all our most recent pieces ➚
Fuego is our heat-seeking Twitter bot, tracking the links the future-of-journalism crowd is talking about most on Twitter.
Here are a few of the top links Fuego’s currently watching.   Get the full Fuego ➚
Encyclo is our encyclopedia of the future of news, chronicling the key players in journalism’s evolution.
Here are a few of the entries you’ll find in Encyclo.   Get the full Encyclo ➚
St. Louis Globe-Democrat
Groupon
Conde Nast
E.W. Scripps
New Haven Independent
Associated Press
Bureau of Investigative Journalism
I-News
NPR
Minneapolis Star Tribune
The Blaze
Bloomberg