I always assumed that a large part of WSJ.com’s success was due to the fact that corporations were paying for many subscriptions vs. individual people. Not true?
Definitely true, as noted above. I just don’t think that’s all of it.
An interesting analysis, and I agree with it for the most part, but the newspaper industry is starting to look a lot like the recording industry in the way it has generally shot itself in the foot by not embracing the Web early enough (or at least embracing it entirely the wrong way.)
[…] for content means you can’t be part of the link economy — see the hole I tried to make here — though I’m compelled to note that the Journal’s parts-for-free, pay-for-whole […]
[…] for content, and I don’t believe it’s impossible or necessarily inadvisable to do so. I’ve written before that the Online Journal’s hybrid model should be better understood and more seriously […]
[…] no ideological disagreement with the idea of newspapers charging for subscriptions — in fact, I’ve urged that more papers look at the hybrid model of WSJ.com, which takes in subscription fees without […]
Comments are closed.
Web veteran Jason Fry explores the challenges faced by newspapers in the digital world.