The idea that you can watch all the world’s news on a subscription model is just not true, according to the chief executive of Time magazine, who believes there’s a “gap” between the “sensible” amount of news that consumers are paying to see and the amount of money that is being spent on subscription models.
Tim O’Reilly told Bloomberg that people are already paying to be entertained, but that this is “not a sustainable model.”
“If we think that there is an economic argument that there are not enough people who are paying for this, we don’t have to do anything,” he said.
The idea is, ‘If you want more news, you pay to be at home.’ “
This is a conversation that has been happening for a long time.
The idea is, ‘If you want more news, you pay to be at home.’
And you have to have that conversation, and I think we need to get on that.”
The idea of paying for something is a pretty common one these days.
You pay to have your news delivered to you, and then you’re also paying to have it delivered to your friends and family.
But as O’Donnell points out, people are spending a lot more money than they are making, and as the media and advertising industry gets more and more expensive, consumers are demanding more news and content.
O’Neil said that in the past, people who subscribed to magazines, newspapers, and newspapers would pay to watch a specific piece of news and have it be delivered to them.
“They were the ones who had the disposable income,” he told Bloomberg.
O’Neill’s comments come amid a shift away from paying for content and toward paying for advertising. “
But today, you can’t do that, and so it becomes a little bit of a Catch-22.”
O’Neill’s comments come amid a shift away from paying for content and toward paying for advertising.
News and advertising have become increasingly saturated in the digital world.
“People have become addicted to ads,” O’Brien said.
For advertisers, it’s hard to get a hit.
“You’re going to go out and do something like this,” OBrien said of subscription models, adding that there’s “an economic argument to say that you should pay for news.”
“You want to be able to tell your story, you want to get your message out, you’re going through a lot of things.”
He noted that the idea of subscribing to a newspaper or magazine is not that new.
“There was a time where we were going to pay to read a newspaper,” Olliesaid.
“It was called a subscription.”
Ollie says that the shift away to paying for news has “taken a lot longer than we’d like,” because the amount that people will pay to see content has become “increasingly unaffordable.”
OLLIE: It’s become increasingly unaffordable for people to subscribe to newspapers and magazines.
And we’re seeing that in terms of subscriptions.
So, if you have a family, you’d rather have that magazine and you’re willing to go through a subscription than to have an ad blocker.
“The whole concept of subscriptions is a little different from traditional magazines, where you pay for an ad-supported piece of content.”
OReilly’s comments echo those of other media experts, who say that subscriptions are not a sustainable way to make money, because it’s “not sustainable” for content creators to make a living from their content.
And there’s another issue that comes into play: advertising revenue.
According to research firm iResearch, the average subscription revenue of a newspaper is about $1.2 million a year.
“What we’ve learned in the last 15 years is that you don’t want to pay the publisher for advertising,” OReilly said.
That’s because it “lacks context,” meaning that advertisers will likely be happy to pay up if they’re getting paid for their content, but they won’t necessarily be happy if they aren’t.
Olly says that if advertisers are paying money to make their ads appear, they will likely put up more ads, “because that is the only way they can be paid.”
“They’re the only source of revenue that a publisher will ever have.”
The way in which publishers make money is through subscriptions, which Ollynsays is a “little different” than the way advertisers make money.
OLLY: They’re the one source of money [that a publisher] will ever need.
And it’s a different way of earning money, and a different type of advertising revenue, and it’s not sustainable.
“A subscription has a lot less context than an ad.
So they’re the source of a publisher’s income, and they’re also the one [source of] advertising revenue,” OLLIESaid.
He continued, saying that advertisers need to understand that “the reason that we’re so successful is that advertisers have been investing in a subscription business model for the last 20 years.”