Paying for the paywall at the News & Record


My hometown newspaper and former employer, the News & Record, is introducing a paywall. Ever since Warren Buffett bought the paper, we knew it was coming. I don’t like it. I think it encourages people to avoid the paper — print and digital — altogether, and I hate that many editors are reduced to shilling for something most don’t actually believe benefits the public. (To his credit, Jeff is pretty direct in his message to readers.)

But I’ve written about my objections to paywalls  enough.

The surprising thing to me – and which I believe is unusual for newspaper paywalls – is that the N&R is charging more for a digital subscription than for a print subscription.

Currently, a 7-day, 52-week subscription costs $187.12. According to an ad in the newspaper today, the digital subscription is $215.40. (FYI, the subscription page on the website hasn’t been updated, at least that I can find.)

In comparison, the News & Observer charges $390 for a year’s print subscription, and only $69.95 for a digital subscription. The Star News in Wilmington charges $218.40 for the print edition, and $131.40 for a digital subscription.

But the N&R is cutting the other way. Editor/Publisher Jeff Gauger explains: “The reason for that variance? A print subscription permits us to subsidize the cost of content by providing access to your home or business for preprinted advertising circulars. A digital-only subscription lacks that advertising subsidy.”

Put aside the idea that many of us might pay not to get the preprints. The newspaper must weigh the costs of non-delivery against the potential loss of preprint revenue. Sending people to a website costs much less than delivering a newspaper to homes. No paper cost, no delivery cost, less production cost. But preprint advertisers pay for delivery to a certain number of homes. They don’t know how many people look at the ads vs. those who pull them from the paper and send them straight to the recycle bin. The advertiser can judge the effectiveness of the ads by the number of people who buy its product.

Here’s the thing: People who subscribe to the print paper, as I do, get digital access free. That means that it’s cheaper to get the paper and digital, than just to get digital.

Is the pricing structured to encourage digital users to subscribe to the paper? After all, the more subscribers a paper has, the more it can charge advertisers. (Despite what many readers think, advertising pays the bulk of the cost of a newspaper, not subscription fees.) I doubt this is the actual intent, but it does make some perverse sense to the consumer. Unless you can get what you need from the website from its 20 free articles per month.

None of this changes my mind that paywalls are a short-term fix and, without valuable new content, a long-term failure. But it will be interesting to watch.

Update: After mentioning this on Twitter, several people chimed in to say their local papers charge more for digital than print. Several also said it makes sense to try to drive people back to print, even if they don’t want it. Me, I get why they’re doing it; I just don’t think it’ll work.

So, charging more for the web to encourage people to subscribe to the paper even though they don’t want the paper is a viable strategy? I’m not convinced. Imagine this: A person dropped the newspaper subscription because he could read what he wanted from the paper’s website. Now, he can subscribe to the newspaper again to read the paper AND the website…it’ll just cost him nearly $200. My bet is that he’s going to read his 20 free articles and go elsewhere. Or maybe that’s just what I’ve done at every newspaper where I’ve hit a paywall.

Update II: More from Newspaper Next and Nieman Journalism Lab.


Sunday sampler

Where we are on front page stories.

4 stories on the front — Durham

3 stories — Greensboro, Charlotte, Winston-Salem, Lenoir, Monroe, Raleigh (one wire); Fayetteville (one wire); Wilmington (two wire).

2 stories — Asheville, High Point, Hickory, Gaston

1 story — Shelby

Charlotte– As the nation deals with the influx of children from south of the border, the Observer writes of a 9-year-old from Honduras. The story puts a human face on the numbers.  “She arrived in Charlotte last month to be reunited with her mother, after a trek from Honduras that had her hiking for days, forging rivers and clinging to the tops of freight trains. She was accompanied by her grandmother, a woman in her 50s who is being held in a Texas detention facility.”

Raleigh — Two stories in the News & Observer. One about environmental tests of water in streams near the 8-acre cleanup site where Ward Transformer dumped toxic PCPs years ago. As the story says, don’t eat the fish. The second is about sexual abuse in the 1970s at Carolina Friends school in Durham. The N&O’s story is an excellent write-through of the revelations that came out last month.

Greensboro – Jim Melvin, former mayor, former head of a local S&L and now head of a charitable foundation that invests in Greensboro, is known as Mr. Greensboro even as he hasn’t held public office in 30+ years. He is disliked by many for politics long in the past. I’ve always liked him for his passion and directness. N&R columnist Jeri Rowe shows a side of Melvin rarely seen — talking about his father’s murder.


Sunday sampler

A little different this week.

Two weeks ago I wrote about the shrinking front page. Fewer stories…fewer reasons to pick up the paper. Here is an update, starting at the top…or bottom, depending on your perspective:

* Four local stories on the front page: Durham

* Four stories on the front: Wilmington, but two are wire stories and the other two are on the same topic.

* Three local stories: Winston-Salem, Charlotte and Sanford

* Three stories: Raleigh and Fayetteville (one wire on each)

* Two local stories: Greensboro, Gaston, High Point, Asheville, Hickory, Monroe.

* One local story: Shelby

Perhaps coincidentally, I found only two that grabbed my attention this morning.

Charlotte — Remember the story about Subway rolls containing yoga mat material? I didn’t know it was a Charlotte activist — the Observer’s headline refers to her as the “food babe,” which is apparently what she calls herself — who said it.  The Observer investigates and finds some of her claims suspicious, unfounded or misleading. Fascinating piece.

Fayetteville– As the legislature argues in Raleigh over the budget, state agencies are winging it…or, in some cases, not. The Observer focuses on the effect on state schools and universities. Given my current situation, it’s personal. “Meanwhile, the university needs to hire adjunct faculty and others to provide enough class sections for students scheduled to graduate in the next two semesters, yet it doesn’t know if it can, Anderson said. A section typically has 30 to 35 students. If no decision is made soon, Anderson will have to proceed.

“‘You end up not offering those sections. That’s all you can do,” he said. “And then, students will then start requesting to try to get into sections that are closed, which gluts those sections. So it’s always a domino effect.’”


Why add stress to your audience?

What if you knew that one of the major story lines in your paper added to the daily stress of your readership? Would you react to that? Would you figure out how to help your readers process that storyline differently?

What if you knew that “news” in general, added to the stress of your viewership? Would it change your news judgment on what and how you broadcast?

The latest report, not on news per se, but on American stress: “Americans cited “hearing about what the government or politicians are doing” as the most frequent daily stressor on their lives, and at a substantially higher rate than the usual annoyances like commuting, chores and general schedule-juggling.”

Think about that for a moment: “The most frequent daily stressor on their lives.”

This is my hometown newspaper, but on any day, you can find newspaper front pages similar to this across the country.

No. 2 on the list was “Watching the news.”

What does this mean for news organizations? A great deal, but my guess is that few will give the survey a second thought. They have enough surveys and enough problems. After all, news consumption is up, even as people actually paying for newspapers has declined for years and the audience for broadcast news is sinking.

But it’s a huge opportunity for those that want to think seriously about their future. Yes, the news is stressful, but your reporting of it doesn’t always have to be. Go out and talk to people and listen to what they tell you. Here is a short version of what I’d say:

* Give less about political bickering. Fights between politicians create a great deal of smoke but little fire. This story about an ethics accusation that is quickly disproved is a good example. Most people don’t care about the kind of middle-school fighting that makes up today’s politics. I know it’s election time and these stories happen. But understand that people are angry at politicians and government. Figure out how your coverage acknowledges and adapts to that.

* Give me less about government operations that have little impact on people. Rather, present government stories from the vantage of how actions affect real people, rather than politicians.

* I know better than to suggest TV turn down political ad money. But you must realize that people hate attack ads. They even make me – a political junkie – change the channel. (This is my favorite: “People don’t like political ads.”) I don’t know how you alleviate that — would fact-checking them hurt your bottom line? — but I’d get your experts working on it.

* The axiom of “if-it-bleeds-it-leads” may work to increase viewership, but it is a dereliction of your community responsibility. This fear-mongering is wrong on every psychological level. And there is data for that and the unnecessary stress it puts in viewers’ minds. Most of us are not consumed by murder or break-ins or traffic fatalities. Few of your viewers know the victims. What is the public service value you’re offering?

* Give me more of two things: investigative reporting and stories of success.

Investigative reporting implies negative reporting about government. But focusing on issues that matter to your readers and viewers is the key, which leads back to asking them. For me, I’d say cut through the bullshit and tell me what’s what. If a politician speaks political double-speak — and watch “House of Cards” for what that is — don’t quote them or call them on it.

Stories of success – last year I called the good news stories — inform and reflect the community more than political stories or crime stories. They reduce stress in people’s lives, and they get talked about.

Plotting your future in this news world is tough. What we know is that ignoring customers, doing little different and playing it safe isn’t the correct path.

Paying for journalism: Community-based crowdfunding

Corey Hutchins at CJR does a good job rounding up the issues, pro and con, surrounding the News & Record’s agreement for arts coverage with ArtsGreensboro. I won’t repeat them.

But because we’re talking about experimenting with new business models for reporting information, let’s take it a step further: community-based crowdfunding of coverage topics.

Steve Buttry suggested it on Facebook last week when he read of the N&R’s arrangement. The idea is simple to articulate, and, certainly, not so simple to execute. But Tim Howard didn’t become the most popular man in America because his role was simple. Rather than contracting with a specific organization or business for coverage, the paper would ask the community what additional coverage it wants and solicit contributions to fund that coverage.

More coverage of UNC sports? Or, in Greensboro, more coverage of A&T sports? More coverage of nightlife? More coverage of the quality of schools. Investigative reporting of governmental practices. The possibilities are endless. When I was at the News & Record and we canceled our New York Times subscriptions, readers called me and offered to pay more so that we would publish Tom Friedman. That’s how devoted readers are to certain topics.

Aside from the financial reward, there are two primary benefits to this method:

First, it permits the community of readers to weigh in on what it wants. As I said earlier, I’m sure that the News & Record readers appreciate additional coverage of the arts, but I doubt it is in the top 5 or even 10 areas desired. My memory of our surveys indicated that education and local government coverage were highly rated. But I am also aware that surveys lie. So, ask readers straight up — in person, in print and online. My observation is that they will tell you straight up, if you just ask. And asking brings engagement and buy-in, both qualities news organizations want.

Second, it spreads the funding responsibility among the entire community of readers. Everyone has the opportunity to give money to supplement a topic of interest. This avoids the sense that one major organization or business is underwriting the coverage. For instance, neither the Sierra Club nor Duke Energy should be sponsoring environmental coverage. But if the entire community is contributing to coverage, there is no “funding overlord.” It seems fairer and less likely to draw accusations of favoritism or bias.

The other advantage in the funding model is that you have less worry about the major underwriter withdrawing. If, after a year, ArtsGreensboro decides the investment isn’t worth it, will the paper go back to its former arts coverage? Readers won’t like that. Under the community-based model, the funding is more diverse.

The obvious hurdle is how to make it work: Will you get enough money? Who will do the additional reporting? How will you avoid the complaints from those who want you to report on their pet areas and reflect their biases? How do you monitor who is donating? Should you monitor who is donating?

Smart people in newsrooms and in the community can answer these questions. (They aren’t really that difficult to answer. Executing them may be.)

Kickstarter has shown that people will invest in good ideas without expectation of a direct payback. “Backers are supporting projects to help them come to life, not to profit financially.”  Other sites — the CJR article links to some — use non-traditional funding models. But neither I nor Steve are familiar with any newspapers that have attempted community-based crowdfunding.

An offshoot could be that as newspapers erect paywalls, they could crowdfund additional content behind that paywall to entice people to pay for the subscription. Or, if the interest is high enough, they could create a pay-only site on the topic and let contributors have access.

Experimentation by journalistic organizations is vital, and newspapers don’t experiment enough. For that, I applaud the News & Record. So, let’s push the experimentation even further.

What is there to lose in giving it a shot? Not much other than time, as far as I can see. So, in the spirit of innovative experimentation, will someone please try it?


The disappearing front page story


Not long ago, it was normal for North Carolina newspapers to publish five stories on their front pages. No longer. Two or three is closer to the norm, at least with the larger papers.

On Sunday — the biggest circulation and advertising day of the week — the two largest papers in the state, the Charlotte Observer and the News & Observer, had three stories. The Winston-Salem Journal also had three. The News & Record in Greensboro, the Fayetteville Observer, the High Point Enterprise, the Gaston Gazette and the Asheville Citizen Times had two.


Of the state’s larger newspapers, the Star News in Wilmington had four stories on its front page, but two of the stories were related.

The Hickory Daily Record only has one story on the front, with a dizzying number of promos and ads.


When I was an editor, I preferred to have four stories on the Sunday front page, much to the occasional dismay of our design director. But I was a word guy and wanted to give readers as much choice as possible. If a story on schools didn’t interest them, perhaps a story on environment or crime or politics would. I also knew that the front page was the most read page in the paper, with declining readership for inside pages or other section fronts.

So what’s happening?

I don’t know, but here is what I think:

Front pages with large dramatic artwork draw the eye. If the primary story the art is illustrating is compelling, it makes the newspaper feel relevant and important. And people like to see strong photography; it catches the eye and evokes emotion, whether it is an embracing couple, an armful of puppies or a teenager pulling a handgun from his pants.

And maybe it will inspire a passerby to pull shell out a couple bucks — or eight quarters if he or she has them — to buy a paper at the box. Impulse buys are a good thing.

Andy Bechtel in the comments correctly points out that pages are smaller, making it more difficult to give five stories decent display on the front. (Andy’s blog.)

To me, it also says a few other things:

Fewer stories. Duh. For instance, my hometown newspaper had four locally produced news stories in Sunday’s paper — two on the front page and two in the local section. Perhaps it’s the result of fewer reporters. Perhaps it’s intentional. Regardless, it gives readers — or at least me — less to read and engage with. (I don’t know about the other papers around the state. Perhaps they backloaded the rest of their local stories.)

Ads and promos have claimed a greater front page presence. Some are done well, inviting readers to other sections of the paper. Others are so packed, the page comes across like a child’s messy room.

A front page with fewer stories demands that those stories by damn good. When there are only two stories, it’s tough to coast. Just as the dominant artwork on the page must be compelling, the accompanying story has to back it up. If it’s not, the reader moves on…but to what? There are only one or two other choices. And do you really want a wire story that was on the Saturday 6 o’clock news on the page, or seen on the web or Twitter or Facebook or an email alert?

What’s my point? Only one that every journalist and every reader share: make the front page the most interesting, exciting and relevant as possible. If you limit the choices on the page, then make the ones out there exceptional, particularly on the biggest circulation day of the week. By all means, play a big story big. And if you have one every Sunday, good. But if you don’t — and many don’t — give us more choice.

(Front page images courtesy of the Newseum.)

Sunday sampler

Asheville — The Citizen Times continues its series on homelessness. Right now, the home page has the paper’s story from last Sunday. Here is a copy of today’s front page. Too bad, too, because based on the story that starts on the front, this looks like another good one. I admit to being a sucker for stories about children in danger.

Charlotte — Having just returned from a trip up I-95 and spending about $20 on tolls, I hate tolls. Yet, I also wondered why we don’t have a toll gate at the Virginia state line and the South Carolina state line. So I read with interest the Observer’s story about the problems lurking with the I-77 toll road. And that’s why I’d put one each at the state lines to charge people going through the state.

Fayetteville — Teenagers and guns. The Observer continues its year-long series on crime. Since the beginning of 2013, there have been 34 homicides in Fayetteville. Seventeen of the people charged in those killings were young – between 14 and 26. Of those 17, all but one is black….Generally, Superior Court Judge Jim Ammons said, they are young black men who were raised by a single parent and dropped out of high school. They grew up watching violence on television and don’t fully understand the consequences of their actions until it is too late.

Greensboro — Who knew that churches encourage you to be online tweeting and Facebooking during the church service?

Raleigh — The N&O profiles the FBI agent who worked N.C. corruption cases; he’s been busy. It’s a fascinating piece about a man who seeks the truth, but it’s also a reminder of all the corrupt politicians and bureaucrats in N.C. Imagine the ones  NOT caught.

Wilmington — My favorite story of the week, shining a light in dark corners. The Star News reports on a businessman who sets up a non-profit to create charter schools, gets millions from the state and then contracts out many of the school services to the private companies he owns. Oh, and executives at the private companies say they don’t have to provide any information about the services they provide.

The News & Record’s arrangement with ArtsGreensboro: Is it pay for play?

There are several troubling aspects of the News & Record’s agreement to allow ArtsGreensboro to underwrite some of the newspaper’s coverage of the arts.

1. At its core, the city’s umbrella arts organization is paying for news coverage. Most reputable news organizations avoid this conflict of interest. One of the principles of journalism, as articulated in “The Elements of Journalism,” is this: “Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.” The idea is that journalists can cover news and events “without fear or favor,” to steal a journalistic credo.

In this a newspaper’s credibility is at stake. From “The Elements of Journalism:” “While editorialists and commentators are not neutral, the source of their credibility is still their accuracy, intellectual fairness and ability to inform–not their devotion to a certain group or outcome.”

Editor-publisher Jeff Gauger explains in his column that the paper’s independence is sacrosanct. I’ll take him at his word. (I appreciate his transparency in announcing the agreement and making note of it with each publication. That’s a significant sign.) But no one should be surprised if readers question when performances are praised, and feature stories overwhelmingly positive. After all, everyone knows who is paying. And while the arts organization says it is comfortable with negative reviews, that’s easy to say now. Wait until the day the review is published.

2. Who is keeping an eye on the operation of the arts organization? Again, from “The Elements of Journalism:” “It must serve as an independent monitor of power.” There is a lot of money involved in the arts in Greensboro. I suspect the newspaper will have its fulltime staff maintain its hard news coverage, but there should be suspicion when a news organization is getting money directly from an agency it writes about. Will the coverage be as intense and skeptical. Knowing the news staff at the paper, I’ve no doubt it will tough-minded, but there will always be that question lingering.

3. Will there be other underwriting arrangements?  According to the Triad Business Journal, ArtsGreensboro is paying $15,000 for 70 stories. That’s much cheaper than advertising in the newspaper. There certainly are groups that want more coverage and have the money to buy it. Environmentalists, religious groups, politicians, baseball lovers…the list is long. If the money is good enough, can it be stopped?

4. From the other side, can the newspaper use the ArtsGreensboro money to pay for a review of a show of a non-ArtsGreensboro member?

Ultimately, the question is whether readers are being served. In “The Elements of Journalism,” authors Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenthiel write that journalism’s first loyalty is to citizens: “This commitment to citizens first is the basis of a news organization’s credibility, the implied covenant that tells the audience the coverage is not slanted for friends or advertisers.”

I’m sure that arts organizations and patrons want more coverage. I don’t doubt that the readers of the newspaper want 70 more stories about the arts. (Readers of newspapers tend to want more of everything, from business to comics.) I doubt, though, that arts coverage is in the top five in the “give-us-more” category.

I am one of those “holier-than-thou” journalists Jeff refers to. (I don’t think my nose is in the air, though.) I’m troubled by the arrangement because it seems to put the paper’s independence and credibility at risk. It raises the question of whether the arts organization — and now any organization — can pay for play. And that’s certainly a business model; it’s just a different business model with different values.

I have a great deal of respect for the journalists at the News & Record. They have weathered tough times. I give them the benefit of the doubt that they will view events with the same analytical eye that they always have. And that editors will be as skeptical in editing tomorrow as they were yesterday. But ultimately, we’ll just wait and see. I hope my discomfort at the arrangement is misplaced.

I am heartened by Jeff’s last comment that it’s a new era and the paper is being creative. I applaud that and hope it spreads.

Sunday sampler

Asheville – I’m a sucker for stories about mistreatment of children. And by sucker I mean that I hate having to read about it.

“Shane Hopkins’ children have never slept on the streets. They’ve never spent a night under a bridge, never slept in his car. They show up to school looking like most every other child in Buncombe County. But they carry an invisible weight: They didn’t have a bed to sleep in or room to call their own for half of the just-finished school year. Skylar, 12, has learned to do her hair and brush her teeth in school bathrooms. “There are no mirrors in (school) in the bathroom, so sometimes I have to walk all the way to the gym,” she said with a shrug. “‘Whatever, it’s annoying.’”

She’s 12. The Citizen publishes a powerful piece about homeless families who may or may not be considered homeless by the various governmental agencies that are charged with helping.

Charlotte — Take curiosity, add initiative and good timing, and you’ve got a multi-million dollar business. The Observer writes about the founder and owner of MadVapes, one of the largest creators of e-cigarettes. A fun, personable story.

Gaston — The Gazette writes about the state budget proposal to cut funding for driver’s education in schools. I learned to drive in a school driver’s ed program and am surprised the state wants to drop a program that seems to have worked just fine. The cynic in me believes that it is simply an effort by the state to act like it is reducing costs, but the effect is that it will be picked up by the local system.

Greensboro — For many 2009 college graduates – getting out of school in the midst of the great recession — job prospects still haven’t improved. In the first of a three-part series, the News & Record sets the scene of the terrible job market. (Yes, I have daughter who graduated in 2009. I am thankful she has a good job in her area of interest.)

News: Appealing to a political audience

What if you ran a business and you discovered that a sizable group of people didn’t have confidence in your product? Hold that thought.

What if you ran a business and you discovered that a sizable group of people didn’t trust your product?

You’d try to change their perception, right? You are trustworthy. You have a great product that deserves their confidence! You’d try marketing to them. You’d try to improve what you produce? You’d survey them and engage with them?

But nothing works.

Gallup: Americans’ faith in each of three major news media platforms — television news, newspapers, and news on the Internet — is at or tied with record lows in Gallup’s long-standing confidence in institutions trend.

More GallupNow, 44% say they have a great deal or fair amount of trust and confidence in the mass media, identical to 2011 but up from 40% in 2012, the lowest reading since Gallup regularly began tracking the question in 1997.

So, now what do you do?

If you run a newspaper, perhaps you should consider this: Slightly less than one-fifth of self-identified conservatives (15%) say they have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in newspapers, tied with the 10-year low…. Liberals are far more likely than conservatives — or than the adult population in general — to be confident in newspapers (34%). Nearly a quarter of moderates (24%), meanwhile, have confidence in newspapers.

At what point does part of the intended audience become outside the main? When does trying to satisfy them hit the point of diminishing returns? When should you shift your paradigm and appeal to the group that has respect for you…where there may be opportunity for growth?

It might well be now.

This will grate on traditional journalists and our love for objectivity. Yet, most people don’t think we are objective and no amount of insisting that we are makes any difference. We can shift, as I have, to emphasize fairness, rather than objectivity, but I don’t know that it makes any difference. So why not be transparent in our biases? Drop the false equivalence. Turn away from Jay Rosen’s “view from nowhere.” Make news judgments differently, knowing that you’re appealing directly to a specific group. Stop worrying about balance on the editorial and OpEd pages. (If nothing else, it means you can drop this guy and this guy.)

It would be a gutsy move, and I doubt many news organizations will consider it. Newspapers are averse to fundamental change, and even though TV news has a lower confidence rating than newspapers, they still rake in the cash. Yes, I know that these data don’t say that conservatives don’t buy or read newspapers. And there are certainly other demographic factors involved in who buys and reads newspapers. (Or watches TV news.)

But given the audience trend lines, it’s worth talking about.