Lately many organizations such as the Online Publishers Association and Jupiter Research have been touting the growing success of online content that people pay real money to receive. However, this rosy picture might be a bit skewed, according to experts quoted in a Nov. 1, 2003 Knowledge@Wharton article, “The Internet Content Conundrum.” It’s definitely worth a read.
My take on a couple of points mentioned in this article…
- Convenience and customization count. Yes, a lot of online information is available for free, and you can find it through Google and other means – but “free” often carries a hidden cost in time, effort, lack of applicability, and lack of credibility. Wharton professor Peter Fader noted in this article, “For (many consumers) it’s not ‘What can I steal?’, but ‘What can I get in the form I want because time is more important to me than money?’”
— I find that’s very true. The online content that I pay for is the stuff that saves me time, or that I don’t have to verify independently. - Screwy newspaper accounting? Some newspaper companies infer revenues from their online ads simply by allocating a portion of print ad revenues – that is, they don’t really report figures for online ad revenues. My fellow E-Media Tidbits contributor Vin Crosbie (of Digital Deliverance) observed, “If a newspaper says that its online service generated $60 million, but $20 million of it is an accounting transfer,” then that can skew the actual revenue picture.”
— True, but I personally don’t have a problem with this method, in order to provide a rough estimate. Now, what I’d like to know is whether there’s a reasonable industry average that could be assumed in such cases. - What is “true” content?” My colleague Anne Holland of MarketingSherpa observed in this article, “You have to read [content publishers'] numbers carefully because they add in things that may or may not be (true content), things like dating services…”
— Yes, there are gray areas where content (especially user-created content) blends with a service offering. But does that mean personal ads, discussion forums, or chat rooms are not “true” content? I’d argue that they are. While that stuff may be disorganized chatter that few people would spend much time reading, I believe it is indeed content. Likewise with music downloads or printed articles that are “repurposed” on the Web – I say it’s all online content.
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds
BlogoSquare
3 Comments so far (Add 1 more)