Can charging for online content really work?

I’ve been very interested to see that Rupert Murdoch is talking about charging for access to the News Corp’s newspaper websites.

Ten years ago, there was lots of experimentation with various charging models for content, and gradually many of them were abandoned as the perception became enshrined that content on the internet should be free. There are a few successful exceptions to this. Some companies such as the FT.com and the Wall Street Journal are managing to charge. And other business to business sites combine some free news content, but with subscriber-only premium content.

Carolyn McCall, the chief executive of the Guardian Media Group commented that charging for B2B content is a ‘no-brainer’. But with the proliferation of so many different news sources, can anyone now seriously expect to introduce charging?

Quality content is now available very widely, and audiences are now accustomed to aggregating their news from many sources, accelerated by the convenience of tools such as RSS feeds. It’s not just the newspaper companies that are delivering news and information. News is available directly from companies and organisations. Bloggers are following trends and issues, with the very best now perceived as on a par with journalists for their in-depth knowledge.

If Murdoch introduces charging and more newspapers follow suit, perhaps all they will do is decrease their share of voice and therefore their importance – ultimately accelerating the decline of an already waning industry.