Does charging for content help Newspapers retain their audience?

Today on the wires an interesting set of stats from the Audit Bureau of Circulations about the continued decline of newspaper companies.  Three of the biggest four newspapers continued to decline, with USA Today, NY Times and Los Angeles Times all posting disappointing year-over-year numbers for the latest reporting period.  The 2nd highest circ paper, The Wall Street Journal, actually grew.

The news wasn’t great – or surprising – for newspapers on the whole.  Circulation has dropped year over year.  This is not news to anyone who follows this beleaguered sector, one funny bright spot came out of the results.

The Wall Street Journal – which covers the similarly beleaguered Finance Industry – posted unexpectedly strong results, growing to almost 2.1 million subs.  This despite the fact that they charge a monthly subscription fee for their online version.

Could it be that a combination of high-quality journalism, unique information and content control is the special sauce for the success of a newspaper business?

The ‘Dead-Tree’ newspaper model is still doomed.  But is there light at the tunnel for those outlets that produce good content?  If you produce original, valuable content (that you are comfortable charging for in print format), can you charge for it in both channels?  I think the answer is yes.

Could it be that charging for original content, and letting everyone else give away ‘news’ for free, is the business model, no matter what the distribution method?

How to save your publication in 140 words or less

I’ve recently been asked to be a regular columnist for MIN Online, the online version of Magazine Industry News, aka ‘MINs’.

Believing as I do that publishers need to get their guerilla on in order to counter the move from print to online, in this article I assert that an active and consisten campaign using Twitter can only benefit your publication.

There are lots of other great articles on the site.  Please visit early and often!