With declining ad revenue sparking interest in a bailout for the newspaper industry, more and more publishers are ready to cross over into paid content territory.

No longer able to depend on advertisers the way they used to, publishers are considering a pay model that compensates them and more importantly, retains viewership.

It’s a move that will work provided the majority of the industry goes along with it. It also helps to have major players jump on the bandwagon too.

None other than Rupert Murdoch himself recently shocked many by announcing that he would charge for content starting next year. It’s practically the only move the industry has left.

Free content may bring in viewers, but the drop in ad sales across the industry shows that those views aren’t translating into revenue fast enough.

The growth of online ad revenue hasn’t kept pace with the erosion of dollars in print advertising. This year, online ad sales will account for $3.1 billion for publishers vs. $35 billion in print (a figure projected to drop below $30 billion this year).

The Wall Street Journal shows that pay can work, with over a million subscribers online annually, with basic rates starting at $103 for plans. The New York Times previously experimented with a fee-based service and is considering it once again.

While pay may be the last option for the rest of the industry, it’s not a slam dunk either. The first thing news organizations have to agree on is a fee system.

With over a 1,000 publishers signing up for Journalism Online, players like Murdoch aren’t taking part.
For their part however, readers will be less worried about how to pay for something, just as long as they can still have access to it.