So the question is, “Would you pay for your news to be delivered to you via an elaborate distribution network similar to that of yesterday’s paper?” Well, it turns out that were going to find out soon enough as Rupert Murdoch and the NY Times are both announcing that they will installing a Pay Wall around their content, essentially preventing anyone who is not “authorized” from accessing it. However, this is on a larger scale than most of us care to be burdened with. What is really going to matter is the local attempts at duplicating these efforts.

I imagine that the real question for Portland is, “Would you pay for content on OregonLive.com?”

My suspicion is that most would not, and here is why I think that to be the case. As I have prescribed to for the past two years of blogging, the majority of Portland’s “young and noisy” typically fall into two categories; bloggers or blog readers. This conclusion, in my eyes, has been found out to be true time and time again through the analytics that I have been shown as the conversations that I have had with my peers. But to base a major assumption such as the success or failure of a Pay Wall at OregonLive.com on this alone would be foolish, what about current subscribers to the website?

It is my understanding that the subscribers or viewers of the website are “typical” or more traditional readers, at least in internet terms. There are typically two kinds of internet readers: trolls and/or gliders. Trolls are those darker characters that seem to always be the first to comment and never have anything constructive to say. Gliders are those who simply pass on through the content for a quick look. Assuming that these two user types of users are the majority of readers at OregonLive.com, it would be easy to conclude that most trolls would leave once the landlord cam knocking and that those passively gliding on through would simply look elsewhere.

With the young and the noisy looking to peers/amatuers in larger numbers and with traditional readers truly lacking the commitment to OregonLive.com to pay for it, I imagine that there is an alternative to the Pay Wall “solution” and that would be a reaffiliation with a specific kind of community in Portland and throughout Oregon that is not currently beign tapped by OregonLive.com.

This community of untapped subscribers, however, needs to see something new and exciting from the Oregonian before they would ever think of paying for it. The relative popularity of OregonLive.com is due to its appeal to the “free crowd” and the site has been designed around this element. To become something that is self-sustaining, the Oregonian is also going to have to launch a new product, something much heavier and significant in the lives of those who need and want the news.

To best describe what I am prescribing, here are the actions that need to be taken by the Oregonian to successfully launch a Pay Wall.

1. Abandon OregonLive.com, whenever you want to stop attracting the trolls and passive audience members.
2. Find a lucrative demographic, based on the 2010 Census, throughout Oregon that is willing to pay for their news.
3. Launch a new product tailored to this audience that is consistent with the values of professional journalism and media standards.

Its a shame to see such a distinguished newspaper as the Oregonian so reliant on members of the Oregon community, primarily Portland, who don’t seem to care for the website. If the future of the Oregonian is anything like the rest of the world, a Pay Wall is likely and a reshaping of its content is important. Were waiting.

Related posts:

1. Oregon Media Central Oregon Media Central is a website geared towards the coverage...
2. Make In Oregon Yesterday I was at Stumptown Coffee in the Ace Hotel...
3. Oregon Loves Podcasts According to Google Search Insights, Oregonian (especially Portland Oregonians) love...
4. Podcamp Portland 2010 I have admit, I am a podcast Fan Boy. I...
5. Starting Over It finally happened, my entire blog was deleted. While I...