Daily Tribune sees 25% drop in online readership
Publisher and editor Henry Waters III said he is pleased with the move.
Published March 8, 2011
The Columbia Daily Tribune's online readership has dropped about 25 percent since the implementation of its online paywall Dec. 1, 2010, said Henry Waters III, publisher and editor of the publication.
The first 10 stories a month are free to view, but after that, online readers are required to pay for a subscription to access additional content. Waters said he expected the 25 percent drop in online pageviews.
"When you start charging, it always goes down," Waters said of the Tribune's drop in online readership. "We're not disappointed on that, because the people that are still looking are still interested."
Waters said the Tribune has about 2,000 readers paying in some form or another for content but that the exact numbers are hard to tell because some online subscription fees for readers also subscribing to the print edition are not due yet.
Despite the drop-off in online readership, Waters said he is still pleased with the move to charge for online content.
"We're very pleased," Waters said. "For one thing, we just can't and don't believe we should continue to provide expensive content and give it away."
Waters said negative reader feedback over the paywall has died down since the beginning of its implementation. He said readers have mostly accepted the decision.
"Most of the comment was when we first announced it, they said, 'Of course we understand this','" Waters said.
Columbia Missourian Executive Editor Tom Warhover said he initially had no idea if more readers would move over to the Missourian when the Tribune started charging for online content. No statistics on the Missourian’s online readership were available, but Warhover said the publication has seen an increase in online readership in the last three months.
"There was kind of a core group, who, with the announcement of the Trib, said they were going to jump over to the Missourian and did," Warhover said.
He also said the Missourian has no plans to charge for online content, aside from launching Kachingle, a type of online tip jar where readers can contribute money.
Comments (2)
11:07 a.m., March 9, 2011
Jonathan said:
I agree with h4x354x0r. There is no doubt that the on line readership of the Tribune has dropped much more than 25%, despite the claims of Hank/Vicki. Where as hundreds used to comment on various articles, that has dropped to a trickle. It does cost money to maintain and monitor a website such as this. However that is not the only reason for charging such a high price for access. The main reason is that the powers that be (City and MU officials) simply don't want the average citizen commenting on various topics. They just don't want to hear from the masses and don't like things exposed. "How dare they say that about the Mayor!". or "How dare MU employees speak out about the waste going in the their departments!" I can imagine these comments and many more were made at the Country and MU clubs. Don't like what the average citizen has to say? Offend your fine sensabilities? Climb down out of your ivory towers and join the real world. Return the on line Tribune the way it was, collect more in advertising dollars, and let people voice their opinions.
3:37 p.m., March 8, 2011
h4x354x0r said:
Only 25%? I'd call that an astounding success. I'd also call Hank a likely liar. The average drop in readership on paywall implementation is 90-95. My visits to the Trib website have certainly dropped at least 90%. Of course the real reason that the online Trib readership has only gone down a supposed 25% is the fact that it's trivial to circumvent the paywall. Everybody I know (including me) has done it. The online Trib reader comments used to be the best entertainment value in Columbia. The comments there now prove that charging does NOT raise the quality of comments. I comment on the Missourian, and the Maneater, now. It works for me.