A new survey says the public will pay for media content — if the need/reason is adequately explained.
"When participants were provided with a compelling justification for the paywall -- that The New York Times was likely to go bankrupt without it -- their support and willingness to pay increased," Cook and Attari concluded.
Again, take that Jay Rosen Jeff Jarvis
Clay Shirky and other new media fluffers who tout "no paywalls" for
selfish reasons:.
That said, the survey authors note that
many people will believe the “information wants to be free” quote out of context and misinterpreted
means they should get newspaper stories for free:
Those publishers should also consider this cautionary note: a majority of The New York Times readers surveyed by Cook and Attari said they wouldn't pay for content and made good on their threat, often by switching to free providers. "The decline reported in our study is echoed in the decrease of over 3.3 million unique website visitors reported in The New York Times marketing materials between the spring of 2011 and 2012," Cook and Attari wrote.
Of course, with more and more papers adopting
paywalls, that option is shrinking. The key will be AP (and Reuters and AFP)
continuing to up their rates they charge news aggregators.
