Will the New York Times see a drop in traffic with its meter wall?

In a press release today, the New York Times indicated that its much-awaited pay meter is on the horizon. The Guardian quotes Arthur Sulzberger as saying he does not expect a drop in web traffic as a result of the change.

When the UK newspaper The Times erected a paywall, it saw a 90% decrease in readership, as people using social networking tools were no longer able to link to its content very efficiently. The New York Times, however, will attempt to strike a balance; leaving its content up for free for the casual user while injecting a paywall after an undetermined number of visits. This way, a person can read an article for free and tweet a link to it without worrying that his readers will hit a brick wall when they arrive. To try to ensure the sharability of the Times content, it will not require payment if you come into the site through a side door — through an RSS feed, a search engine, or a link. Though we don’t know the exact ramifications, this seems to indicate that only people who come in through NYTimes.com will be charged. Perhaps also people who come in through a side link and continue clicking through articles.

There are two unknowns in this equation:

1. If it’s easy to get in through a side door, will savvy consumers simply Google New York Times headlines to avoid paying? I already do this often when I encounter the Wall Street Journal’s paywall.

2. Even though the Times will allow a certain number of free visits, will the mere existence of a paywall automatically drive down inbound links? If the fourth article I read on the New York Times is locked down and unaccessible, then I as a reader won’t be able to link to it. Certainly the publisher is expecting at least some drop in traffic?

You can follow me on Twitter or on Facebook

Comments are closed.

Blog Widget by LinkWithin