QOTD: Would You Pay For Content Online?

Over the last year, newspapers have seen a steady decline in print sales, with more readers logging online to get their daily dose of current affairs. Whether or not it signifies the death knell of the newspaper and magazine business, the industry is faced with a very big problem: how do you make online revenue match the money made from print sales?

One solution that nobody seems to be a fan of (that is, nobody but newspapers) is introducing subscriptions to the sites. Similar to the way you subscribe to a certain newspaper in the real world, you'd subscribe to them online. Instead of having the newspaper delivered to your door every morning, you'd log online and view the news from the comfort of your own home or office.

While tons of people are opposed to the idea of paying a subscription for news on the internet, there's a significant amount who are of the opinion that if the content is of a good quality, then why shouldn't we pay for it?

Today's question of the day is would you consider paying for the online content that you consume each day? If so, how would the content have to be different for you to feel that it's worth paying for it?

Create a new thread in the US News comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
118 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • p05esto
    Nope, wouldn't pay. Unless all the free sources went away, then I might $20 a year for a news subscription service that I could customize to include the types of news I want to see (world, human interest, tech, etc). Otherwise, I'm too busy and news isn't all that important to me...rarely affects my personal life.
    24
  • Anonymous
    NO!
    22
  • Anonymous
    I find think charging for news content online is a horrible idea that will fail quickly.

    Web designers know that simply adding an extra click to the process of reaching content will dissuade most users. Sites that have added registration saw their readership drop tremendously (and most news sites that once required registration have ended the process quickly).

    Even if they charge 10 cents per month I predict most users will refuse to pull out their credit card and will instead find their news elsewhere.

    News sites need to stop whining that ads are not profitable enough to survive. CNN.com has always been free and is extremely profitable.
    17
  • Other Comments
  • p05esto
    Nope, wouldn't pay. Unless all the free sources went away, then I might $20 a year for a news subscription service that I could customize to include the types of news I want to see (world, human interest, tech, etc). Otherwise, I'm too busy and news isn't all that important to me...rarely affects my personal life.
    24
  • Anonymous
    NO!
    22
  • Anonymous
    I find think charging for news content online is a horrible idea that will fail quickly.

    Web designers know that simply adding an extra click to the process of reaching content will dissuade most users. Sites that have added registration saw their readership drop tremendously (and most news sites that once required registration have ended the process quickly).

    Even if they charge 10 cents per month I predict most users will refuse to pull out their credit card and will instead find their news elsewhere.

    News sites need to stop whining that ads are not profitable enough to survive. CNN.com has always been free and is extremely profitable.
    17