Tear Down Those (Pay) Walls

As I left Toronto last week, I found myself thinking about the butterfly effect. The old adage has never been more appropriate, as world travels the world 24-hours a day, influencing business and government alike. It's why I boarded my flight with an iPhone full of news, insight and analysis from sources around the world. Now more than ever, a global perspective is crucial to interpreting events. It was with this in mind that I embarked for the UK, excited to discover Fleet Street's best.

Imagine my surprise when I arrived to find The Times/Sunday Times secured behind a dreaded paywall. At £1 a day, or £2 a week – or £9.99 a month on an iPad – I would be permitted access to The Times Online. Without a subscription, I would be totally locked out. No Google search or re-tweet would permit me access to the insights and news The Times had deemed worthy of printing. A newcomer to the U.K., and to paywalls, I decided to investigate further.

Globally, there's no real discernable trend towards paid content. Recently, Rolling Stone has been one of the first magazines to install a paywall. In Canada, none of the major dailies or magazines have barred access to content. The New York Times tore down its subscriber service in 2007, only to announce it would be rebuilding it – stronger, but also more accessible – in 2011. But for the most part, the industry appears to have taken a 'wait and see' approach.

So while many news organizations have been mulling over subscription-based services, News International has led the way – a dubious honour, perhaps – in its attempts to shove the genie back into its bottle. Having locked up access to flagship titles The Wall Street Journal and The Times, CEO Rupert Murdoch has ensured that articles from those publications will be omitted from Google searches and Twitter, available only to subscribers. When the walls went up, Murdoch claimed that "...we can {now} deliver our content to our readers when, where and how they want it. It's cheap, convenient and constantly up-to-date.''

Unfortunately, that's not been the case. As evidenced by the arrest of Asil Nadir last week, placing content behind a paywall has not only locked the huddled masses out, but it has locked exclusive coverage inside.
As The Independent points out, the Nadir rendition story could have been a significant coup for The Times. Instead, it is another reminder of why advertisers are fleeing The Times in droves. While the paper may be constantly up-to-date – outside the paywall, who would know? - it has proven neither cheap nor convenient.
In fact, it is preventing The Times – traditionally a trusted source - from accessing a broader global audience. Their subscriber rate is falling, advertisers are fleeing, and they're closing themselves off in a sarcophagus of their own construction.

In the world of new journalism, a headline is bound only by how many times it is retweeted, shared, or emailed. But the Times is stonewalling such efforts. As a result, The Times and its journalists are now barred from becoming part of the great global conversation that the information age has allowed us to have. Posting and retweeting open up sources and channels we many never otherwise discover.
This is why sources like the New York Times are read from Brooklyn to Bangalore; as a trusted news source, the NYT is accessible to readers across the globe. Its stories are sent far and wide, exposing the paper, its journalists- and its advertisers – to new audiences every day. Along with other trusted sources such as the BBC, the New York Times is increasingly relied on for trusted reporting across the globe, available to anyone with a broadband or mobile connection.

Murdoch's Times has voluntarily stepped out of that shared space, ensuring that only its subscribers can access content, and preventing them from sharing with non-subscribers. This 'balkanization' of information– as The Economist referred to it last week – is out of step with an internet that is, for the most part, becoming more, not less, open and accessible. For every paywall, there is a Twitter account; for every subscription service, a Twitpic that breaks the news.

Will Rupert Murdoch's paywall debacles serve as a lesson for the industry? I certainly hope so. There are clear implications for the global readership, and for historically respected newspapers such as The Times.
With the genie released, organizations will need to find a way to make a profit while maintaining access. Otherwise, they risk losing not only their place in the conversation, but their stature as a respected global source.

Sarko's Bad Day

Some of you might have seen this story earlier today. Someone - or some group - effectively used the power - and global brand - of Google to affect the reputation of France's embattled President. What do you think? Is Google-bombing a passing fad, or will we see search engine redirects becoming more prevalent?
http://www.tdg.ch/actu/monde/sarkozy-victime-mauvais-plaisantins-google-2010-09-06

Crisis Communication

In the past year, a number of prominent global brands have been affected by crises that required some sort of immediate reaction. As the crisis continues, information is key, and everything the company does is put under the microscope.

During such crises, media measurement can prove particularly useful, allowing communications managers to track the overall tone of media comment as well as the specific position of individual newspapers, journalists and spokespeople. Possessing this information - alongside influential social media chatter - can prove crucial to the creation of an effective strategy, and to the eventual success of any crisis communication.

These articles from The Huffington Post, The New York Times and Canada's CTV provide a few examples of companies that have struggled with crisis communication, alongside those that have communicated effectively.

What do you think? Which organizations have handled crisis particularly well? Who has done a poor job?


The opinions and views expressed in this blog are the personal opinions of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of Echo Research, its staff or any of its affiliates.