Asking readers to pay has become the go-to answer in digital news. In 2020, I think we’ll start to discover one constraint of that model.
Those of us old enough to have been around at the outbreak of the digital revolution will recall how much resistance there was initially to requiring regular readers to pay for content online. When The Wall Street Journal, where I then worked, started asking digital readers to subscribe and pay shortly after it launched 23 years ago, we were widely derided, told we just “didn’t get it” and that “information wants to be free.” (Even though Stewart Brand had also wisely said it wanted to be expensive.) Even 11 years and hundreds of thousands of online subscribers after that, Rupert Murdoch — who wanted desperately to own the Journal, despite his dislike of the most distinctive things about it — made clear that he would drop the paywall once he got control. When he did, and got a look under the hood at the facts of the business, he promptly reversed himself.
Eventually, the Financial Times developed a better mousetrap with its metering of readers, and The New York Times adopted the FT approach, to its great good fortune (especially in the Age of Trump); The Washington Post eventually followed suit. But what then emerged is that even metered paywalls won’t work unless you have high quality content — high quantities of it. That’s why many metropolitan newspapers haven’t found salvation in paywalls: Their best content is still excellent, but most simply don’t have enough of it.
For those who do — the FT, the Times, the Journal, perhaps a few others — subscribers will save these enterprises from what would otherwise be likely failure as their advertising business continues to evaporate.
In many ways, that’s great news. The worst fears of people like former Shorenstein Center director Alex Jones in his Losing the News won’t be realized. And the resulting transformation of these publications’ business model will make them more responsive to their readers.
But in that very responsiveness, there’s a phenomenon I think we should also view with concern. Publications whose economic survival depends entirely on giving readers what they want may shy from giving them anything they might not want, or might not like.
The first implication of this could be less news of the “eat your broccoli” variety. That’s not good, especially in a society that tends to ignore subjects until they become full-blown crises. (Think climate change, or opioids until fairly recently.) But the next implication is even worse — the part in which you avoid telling your customers about things they might not like.
Consider, for instance, how this might apply to politics. The traditional press justly derogates the head-in-the-sand nature of much of Fox News’ coverage of President Trump’s lies and self-dealing. But when their own business model depends entirely on subscriber renewals, could they withstand the temptation to temper scrutiny of the misdeeds of some subsequent president more aligned with their own audience? And let me hasten to add that I recognize that this same concern could extend to nonprofits, like the one I help run, who depend to an increasing extent on a large number of reader-donors.
A publication more closely aligned with its readers is mostly a good thing, of course, and reader revenue filling some of the advertising gap is one of the most glad tidings we’ve had in a journalism industry era in which very bad tidings are cresting. But new answers eventually pose their own new questions, and the emerging business model of quality news is no exception.
Richard J. Tofel is president of ProPublica.
Asking readers to pay has become the go-to answer in digital news. In 2020, I think we’ll start to discover one constraint of that model.
Those of us old enough to have been around at the outbreak of the digital revolution will recall how much resistance there was initially to requiring regular readers to pay for content online. When The Wall Street Journal, where I then worked, started asking digital readers to subscribe and pay shortly after it launched 23 years ago, we were widely derided, told we just “didn’t get it” and that “information wants to be free.” (Even though Stewart Brand had also wisely said it wanted to be expensive.) Even 11 years and hundreds of thousands of online subscribers after that, Rupert Murdoch — who wanted desperately to own the Journal, despite his dislike of the most distinctive things about it — made clear that he would drop the paywall once he got control. When he did, and got a look under the hood at the facts of the business, he promptly reversed himself.
Eventually, the Financial Times developed a better mousetrap with its metering of readers, and The New York Times adopted the FT approach, to its great good fortune (especially in the Age of Trump); The Washington Post eventually followed suit. But what then emerged is that even metered paywalls won’t work unless you have high quality content — high quantities of it. That’s why many metropolitan newspapers haven’t found salvation in paywalls: Their best content is still excellent, but most simply don’t have enough of it.
For those who do — the FT, the Times, the Journal, perhaps a few others — subscribers will save these enterprises from what would otherwise be likely failure as their advertising business continues to evaporate.
In many ways, that’s great news. The worst fears of people like former Shorenstein Center director Alex Jones in his Losing the News won’t be realized. And the resulting transformation of these publications’ business model will make them more responsive to their readers.
But in that very responsiveness, there’s a phenomenon I think we should also view with concern. Publications whose economic survival depends entirely on giving readers what they want may shy from giving them anything they might not want, or might not like.
The first implication of this could be less news of the “eat your broccoli” variety. That’s not good, especially in a society that tends to ignore subjects until they become full-blown crises. (Think climate change, or opioids until fairly recently.) But the next implication is even worse — the part in which you avoid telling your customers about things they might not like.
Consider, for instance, how this might apply to politics. The traditional press justly derogates the head-in-the-sand nature of much of Fox News’ coverage of President Trump’s lies and self-dealing. But when their own business model depends entirely on subscriber renewals, could they withstand the temptation to temper scrutiny of the misdeeds of some subsequent president more aligned with their own audience? And let me hasten to add that I recognize that this same concern could extend to nonprofits, like the one I help run, who depend to an increasing extent on a large number of reader-donors.
A publication more closely aligned with its readers is mostly a good thing, of course, and reader revenue filling some of the advertising gap is one of the most glad tidings we’ve had in a journalism industry era in which very bad tidings are cresting. But new answers eventually pose their own new questions, and the emerging business model of quality news is no exception.
Richard J. Tofel is president of ProPublica.
Matthew Pressman News consumers divide into haves and have-nots
Logan Jaffe You don’t need fancy tools to listen
Jeremy Gilbert and Jarrod Dicker A call for collaboration between storytelling and tech
Hossein Derakhshan AI can’t conjure up an Errol Morris
Alana Levinson Brand-backed media gets another look
Ståle Grut OSINT journalism goes mainstream
Meg Marco Everything happens somewhere
Nico Gendron Make better products if you want to reach Gen Z
Jim Brady We’ll complain about other people living in bubbles while ignoring our own
Mario García Think small (screen)
Irving Washington Leadership isn’t something you learn on the job
Kourtney Bitterly Transparency isn’t just a desire, it’s an expectation
Mariana Moura Santos The future of journalism is collaborative
Sarah Stonbely More people start caring about news inequality
S. Mitra Kalita The race to 2021
Christa Scharfenberg It’s time to make journalism a field that supports and respects women
An Xiao Mina The Forum we wanted, the forum we got
Victor Pickard We reclaim a public good
Lauren Duca The rise of the journalistic influencer
Kerri Hoffman Opening closed systems
Sue Robinson Campaign coverage as test bed for engagement experiments
Linda Solomon Wood Everyone in your organization, moving toward a common goal
Cristina Kim Public media stops trying to serve “everybody”
Moreno Cruz Osório In Brazil, collaboration in a time of state attacks
Tamar Charney From broadcast to bespoke
Carrie Brown-Smith Engaged journalism: It’s finally happening
Bill Adair A Nobel Prize, a Brad Pitt film, and a Taylor Swift song
Helen Havlak Platforms shine a light on original reporting
Rachel Schallom The value of push alerts goes beyond open rates
Meredith Artley Stronger solidarity among news organizations
Greg Emerson News apps fall further behind
Stefanie Murray Charitable giving goes collaborative
Joanne McNeil A return to blogs (finally? sort of?)
Catalina Albeanu Rebuilding journalism, together
Rachel Davis Mersey The business of local TV news will enter its downward slide
Jakob Moll A slow-moving tech backlash among young people
Rasmus Kleis Nielsen The business we want, not the business we had
Jonas Kaiser Russian bots are just today’s slacktivists
Madelyn Sanfilippo and Yafit Lev-Aretz News coverage gets geo-fragmented
Laura E. Davis Know the context your journalism is operating within
Geneva Overholser Death to bothsidesism
Tanya Cordrey Saying no to more good ideas
Dan Shanoff Sports media enters the Bronny era
Josh Schwartz Publishers move beyond the metered paywall
John Keefe Journalism gets hacked
Alexandra Borchardt Get out of the office and talk to people
Craig Newmark Formalizing newsrooms’ battle against disinformation
Gordon Crovitz Fighting misinformation requires journalism, not secret algorithms
Sarah Alvarez I’m ready for post-news
Kathleen Searles Pay more attention to attention
Annie Rudd The expanded ambiguity of the news photograph
Kristen Muller The year we operationalize community engagement
Matt DeRienzo Local broadcasters begin to fill the gaps left by newspapers
Lucas Graves A smarter conversation about how (and why) fact-checking matters
Tonya Mosley The neutrality vs. objectivity game ends
Julia B. Chan We 👏 take 👏 breaks 👏
Whitney Phillips A time to question core beliefs
Eric Nuzum Podcasting finally creates another mega-hit show
Ben Werdmuller Use the tools of journalism to save it
Fiona Spruill The climate crisis gets the coverage it deserves
Jake Shapiro Podcasting gets listener relationship management
A.J. Bauer A fork in the road for conservative media
Knight Foundation Five generations of journalists, learning from each other
Felix Salmon Spotify launches a news channel
Bill Grueskin Our ethics codes get an overhaul
Barbara Gray Join local libraries on the frontlines of civic engagement
Nathalie Malinarich Betting on loyalty
Margarita Noriega The platforms try to figure out what to do with single-subject newsrooms
Juleyka Lantigua A changing industry amps up podcasters’ ambitions
Anthony Nadler Clash of Clans: Election Edition
Alfred Hermida and Mary Lynn Young The promise of nonprofit journalism
Tom Glaisyer Journalism can emerge newly vibrant and powerful
John Garrett It’s the best time in a century to start a local news organization
Masuma Ahuja Slower, quieter, more measured and thoughtful
Doris Truong The year of radical salary transparency
Heather Bryant Some kinds of journalism aren’t worth saving
Elizabeth Hansen and Jesse Holcomb Local news initiatives run into a capital shortage
Cory Haik We’re already consuming the future of news — now we have to produce it
Peter Bale Lies get further normalized
Mira Lowe The year of student-powered journalism
Beena Raghavendran The year of the local engagement reporter
Sara K. Baranowski A big year for little newspapers
Monique Judge The year to organize, unionize, and fight
Colleen Shalby Journalists become media literacy teachers
Don Day Respect the non-paying audience
Raney Aronson-Rath News deserts will proliferate — but so will new solutions
Zizi Papacharissi A president leads, the press follows, reality fades
Kevin D. Grant The free press stands against authoritarians’ attacks on truth
Richard Tofel A constraint of the reader-revenue model emerges
Joshua P. Darr All that campaign cash will make the media’s problems worse
Sonali Prasad Climate change storytelling gets multidimensional
Jasmine McNealy A call for context
Francesco Zaffarano TikTok without generational prejudice
Pablo Boczkowski The day after November 4
Ernie Smith The death of the industry fad
Elizabeth Dunbar Frank talk, and then action
Emily Withrow The year we kill the news article
Jeremy Olshan All journalism should be service journalism
Sarah Schmalbach Journalist, quantify thyself
M. Scott Havens First-party data becomes media’s most important currency
Simon Galperin Journalism becomes more democratic
Joni Deutsch Podcasting unsilences the silent
Brenda P. Salinas Treating MP3 files like text
Nicholas Jackson What’s left of local gets comfortable with reader support
Nushin Rashidian Are platforms a bridge or a lifeline?
J. Siguru Wahutu Western journalists, learn from your African peers
Carl Bialik Journalists will try running the whole shop
Cindy Royal Prepare media students for skills, not job titles
Sarah Marshall The year to learn about news moments
Talia Stroud The work of reconnecting starts November 4
Jennifer Brandel A love letter from the year 2073
Seth C. Lewis 20 questions for 2020
Dannagal G. Young Let’s disrupt the logic that’s driving Americans apart
Jeff Kofman Speed through technology
Imaeyen Ibanga Let’s take it slow
Logan Molyneux and Shannon McGregor Think twice before turning to Twitter
Heidi Tworek The year of positive pushback
Michael W. Wagner Increasingly fractured, but little bit deliberative
Alice Antheaume Trade “politics” for “power”
Errin Haines Race and gender aren’t a 2020 story — they’re the story
Mary Walter-Brown and Tristan Loper Power to the people (on your audience team)
Steve Henn The dawning audio web
Rick Berke Incoming fire from both left and right
Mike Caulfield Native verification tools for the blue checkmark crowd
Rachel Glickhouse Journalists get left behind in the industry’s decline
Joe Amditis Collaborative journalism takes its rightful place at the table
Candis Callison Taking a cue from Indigenous journalists on climate change