There’s a temptation when an online experiment fails to engage in the “I Told You So” game, which generally doesn’t do anyone any good. The New York Times tried its luck with its Times Select subscription service. It didn’t work. I don’t penalize people for trying, especially online. But I do like to take what lessons I can from failure. One of the lessons from the Times Select experiment may not be so obvious.
The failure of Times Select along with the recent failure of CNN’s Pipeline should put to an end the notion that people will pay for online news. But I think most people understand that. There are so many choices out there that if one site wants me to pay, I’ll just go to another. If your columnists are behind a paid firewall — heck, I can live without them. It turns out the marketplace wasn’t screaming for subscription-based opinion.
Fine.
But here’s another conclusion: we think our brands are bigger than they really are.
This is a harder one to accept. But I have to tell you that nearly every news outlet believes they are the brand in their area for news. And they can’t all be. Or maybe they are — and it’s not news that people are looking for online. Does it matter if you’re the brand for news when I’m searching for reliable restaurant listings?
Times Select believed that people would pay for its writers because it is “The Times.” CNN believed people would subscribe to its video service because it’s “CNN.” This is no different from stations and newspapers believing that people will visit their sites because they are “the news channel” or they have “the brand” for trust. The fact is that the information rules.
There is a blog I like in my hometown, and I don’t for a minute care that the guy who runs it appears to be a little off his nut. In fact, it’s part of his charm. In fact, I’d go so far as to say he is “the brand” for “off his nut!” But along the way to being a few cents north of eccentric, he posts some pretty good stuff, including Photoshopped pictures that show what certain areas of town would look like if the town would only clear away some brush or take down old signs, entertaining critiques of town meetings (a phrase I never thought I’d write) and occasionally he writers some damn good opinion.
He’s a voice, and he’s far more relevant to my life than a Times opinion writer or CNN live stream of a Capitol Hill hearing. But he’s free and that’s the point. We choose our media diet based upon the information. Should I write off the local blogger because he’s not associated with a traditional media outlet? We see all the choices out there and make our decisions about what to trust and what to put in our RSS readers. And I have to tell you, nobody’s stabbing-of-the-day is in my Google Reader.
On the Web, you can’t assume your offline brand means anything. That’s especially true when there is so much information that is so similar to your own. (Admit it.) Learn the lesson from Times Select — the right lesson. No — not that people won’t pay you anything. The lesson is that you have to rethink your brand and what it means to meet the online audience on their terms.
No related posts.
Discussion
Comments for “Learning the right lesson from Times Select”