Could Wall save the professional journalism?

As I pointed out many times by now, I am really concerned about the future of journalism – but today I want to present you some different point of view. Surely you are all familiar with the Rupert Murdoch idea of walling off the content available on the internet. There are several theories (claims) about this subject, some are concerned “what if he really builds the wall and allows only to subscribers to access the information and news available online” others are very optimistic and don’t believe this could really happen.

Here I want to present you the David Simon’s point of view in his article “Build the Wall” that I found really interesting. For Simon the power to save as he called the “high end journalism” is in the hand of two paper executives (Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Katharine Weymouth the publishers of The New York Times and The Washington Post), who can, as he claims, rescue an imploding industry and thereby achieve an essential civic goo for the nation.

He appeals to them the idea that content matters, and that they have to find a way to make people pay for that content. For him it is the only way to have a product, an industry, a calling and a career known as a professional journalism. “If the only way to read the Times is to buy the Times, online or off, then readers who clearly retains desire for that product will reach for their wallets,” is convinced Simon. For this purpose he stressed few possible outcomes (scenarios), if the Times and the Post go ahead and build that wall:

First scenario: “The Times and the Post survive, their revenue streams balanced by still consliderable print advertising, the bump in the price of home delivery and newsstand sales, and, finally, a new influx of cheap yet profitable online subscriptions.” Most metro dailies will follow suit, says Simon, when they will see the paid content formula can work. And as they do, they re-emphasize that which makes them unique – local coverage, local culture, local voices, all coupled with wire-service offerings from the national papers otherwise available only through paid sites.

Second scenario: “In those cities where regional papers collapse, the vacuum creates and opportunity for new, online subscription-based news organizations that cover state and local issues, sports and finance, generating enough revenue to maintain a slim – but paid – metro desk. The additional plus at this scenario should be, for Simon, that advertisers – now considering a paid circulation base rather than meaningless Web hits – might be willing to once again pay a meaningful rate.

Third scenario: Is the worst of three scenarios. The Times and the Post survive because of their coverage is unique and essential. At the same time regional dailies, too eviscerated to offer a credible local product, cannot get enough online subscriptions – so they wither and die. Here new online news ventures are stillborn because both national papers become national.

Simon concludes with the fact that longer it will take for the newspaper industry to act together, more likely it is that regional dailies will be too weak and hollow to step through the online-subscription portal.

I don’t know if the subscription model could save the critical and professional journalism, and if we are honest nobody knows that. But sure it is one try that is worth consideration and reflection.