I was reading through an article on Poynter about the NYTimes dropping "Times Select" -- their paid content model, and something about the tone of the story and the tone of the situation rubbed me the wrong way.
Everyone is talking about how the NYTimes is giving away this service now to their readers, and even those icky 'indirect readers' (worst term ever by the way -- it's called potential customers... you know those you want to court and engage...) -- but the Times really suffered through a vital lesson in scarcity. If everyone is giving away something -- it may not be as profitable for you to try and sell it outright.
What's baffling to me is that the Times just doesn't get it. When I buy a newspaper, I'm not buying the news -- I'm buying the portable format itself. I can get news for free -- everywhere -- I don't need to shill out a couple bucks for news alone. As technologies adapt, and as Imagination buys me that iPhone (:), I will no longer need to buy that portable format anymore either -- hence no more buying the newspaper. Sorry.
Comments