If you are the best, you have no reason to fear the rest

If you are the best, you have no reason to fear the rest

It is human nature, no matter your social standing, if an online news magazine is free, there’s no better way to go. 

The ‘to charge or not to charge’ dilemma gains monumental proportions when established magazines also join the bandwagon of offering freebies. And therein begins an impasse. The writers are not for free, nor even can an established magazine sustain itself for long doling out handsome freebies for ‘the free addict’.

 Is there a way out? I don’t see one. The upstart online magazines will almost always give their content for free and will have a fair share of audience. Why? Because it’s free, never mind that it is not good. But it’s not them but the quality news magazines that I am concerned about and that forms the major focus of my intention in this write-up.

Any Johnny would tell you that if you are serious about fair and good content, then a keen reader in need of such content would not mind paying for it. The numbers may be smaller but the brand loyalty would be greater. But the burning question is do you want to be an exclusive magazine or would you like to draw the audiences away from other sundry magazines as well? Is it possible? Can you cut the cake and eat it too? Can you convert the roving eye into a faithful groom? Ordinarily I would think not, but if the established news magazines work harder at it, sure, it’s possible.

The following are some of the ways this could be achieved:

Give the run-of-the-mill stories that perhaps every online magazine would come up with for free. You still have the edge as you are established.

 Keep the rest of the articles - your carefully gleaned research findings, your special news, the case studies, matters close to the industry but which other magazines haven’t picked up – under wraps.

 So how do you get them to pay?

You don’t.

As you know, the freebie generation are succours for all things free. As that’s not always possible, meet them half way. Give them a slice, a blurb of what to expect from the article which you can read completely only if you subscribe to it. I think some of the magazines are already doing that with, may I add, modest results.

Let me illustrate the point: I am a casual reader of Harvard Business Review (hbr.org). I read what interests me online. And bless them, it’s for free. But hold on a second, not everything is. You have to be a subscriber to avail of some of the more interesting articles.

If hbr.org had made everything for subscribers only, they would have lost loyal readers like me, but by making some of the content available only if I subscribe, they invite me to subscribe, making me wish I had the money. 

They have not lost me and although I might go to other management sites (Are there any better? Are you kidding me?) that are free, I’d swear by the news that hbr.org provides. It’s just that it may take them a little more time to convince me to buy...

Would I pay if online news came bundled in a bouquet of other worthy news magazines? I’m not so sure. Why should I pay for something I have little interest in back home in India just because it comes in a bouquet of websites? I think I would resent having to pay for all when I want to read, or have time to read only a few.

If I may add a little something more: I think the reader would be very grateful if you could gauge the depth of his pocket before charging what he might feel is an exorbitant price for a (yes, I know) quality online news magazine.

As long as there’s no dearth of quality news, there will be no dearth of discerning readers.

To put it more succinctly:

If you are the best, you have no reason to fear the rest.