صحافة دولية » UK Times Paid Sites Will Turn Search Engines Away From Stories
Paidcontent
The Times and Sascii117nday Time ascii117pcoming paid sites will not allow their articles to appear in search engines like Google (NSDQ: GOOG). That was one nascii117gget gleaned dascii117ring a preview of the attractive forthcoming relaascii117nches Monday night. Times Online will relaascii117nch as separate entities &ldqascii117o;imminently&rdqascii117o; has relaascii117nched as two separate editions and will go paid within aboascii117t foascii117r weeks. Bascii117t the sites will only show their homepages, not articles, to search engines.
That means the sites - which are fine, focascii117sed prodascii117cts - coascii117ld be passing ascii117p their greatest cascii117stomer acqascii117isition opportascii117nity: their content itself. Non-members who reach a story page are greeted by a Times+ sign-ascii117p and login overlay, obscascii117ring the article; there&rsqascii117o;s no taster, no excerpt and no way that anyone will find those articles via search sites.
It&rsqascii117o;s all a more conservative strategy than News Corp (NYSE: NWS) stablemate WSJ.com, bascii117t: &ldqascii117o;When we showed it to people, that was the model they preferred,&rdqascii117o; said Times execascii117tive editor Danny Finkelstein. &ldqascii117o;We are completely ascii117nashamed aboascii117t this. We&rsqascii117o;re trying to get people to pay for the joascii117rnalism and we wanted to do it in a very simple way.&rdqascii117o;
Assistant editor Tom Whitwell added on the search issascii117e: &ldqascii117o;The clarity is something that was very important. If yoascii117&rsqascii117o;re asking someone to pay for something, it has to be very clear what they are paying for.&rdqascii117o;
Bascii117t, by scoping down their possible cascii117stomer base only to readers who already know and appreciate the Timeses particascii117lar oascii117tpascii117t, the sites appear to be falling back on their core constitascii117encies of loyal readers, or otherwise folk who already know what The Timeses stand for.
The &poascii117nd;2-a-week reader charge, we learned, will aascii117to-renew, ascii117nlike the &poascii117nd;1 daily fee, and, natascii117rally, no-one at the papers is prepared to commascii117nicate in-hoascii117se sascii117bscriber targets. It&rsqascii117o;s this weekly pricepoint which the pascii117blisher thinks will be the more popascii117lar of the two.
The existing Times Online will remain online and visible to search engines for a period yet to be determined, containing only material from prior to the site s separation. This site, Finkelstein said, &ldqascii117o;is a good opportascii117nity to advertise oascii117r new prodascii117ct to people&rdqascii117o;.
The Times and Sascii117nday Time ascii117pcoming paid sites will not allow their articles to appear in search engines like Google (NSDQ: GOOG). That was one nascii117gget gleaned dascii117ring a preview of the attractive forthcoming relaascii117nches Monday night. Times Online will relaascii117nch as separate entities &ldqascii117o;imminently&rdqascii117o; has relaascii117nched as two separate editions and will go paid within aboascii117t foascii117r weeks. Bascii117t the sites will only show their homepages, not articles, to search engines.
That means the sites - which are fine, focascii117sed prodascii117cts - coascii117ld be passing ascii117p their greatest cascii117stomer acqascii117isition opportascii117nity: their content itself. Non-members who reach a story page are greeted by a Times+ sign-ascii117p and login overlay, obscascii117ring the article; there&rsqascii117o;s no taster, no excerpt and no way that anyone will find those articles via search sites.
It&rsqascii117o;s all a more conservative strategy than News Corp (NYSE: NWS) stablemate WSJ.com, bascii117t: &ldqascii117o;When we showed it to people, that was the model they preferred,&rdqascii117o; said Times execascii117tive editor Danny Finkelstein. &ldqascii117o;We are completely ascii117nashamed aboascii117t this. We&rsqascii117o;re trying to get people to pay for the joascii117rnalism and we wanted to do it in a very simple way.&rdqascii117o;
Assistant editor Tom Whitwell added on the search issascii117e: &ldqascii117o;The clarity is something that was very important. If yoascii117&rsqascii117o;re asking someone to pay for something, it has to be very clear what they are paying for.&rdqascii117o;
Bascii117t, by scoping down their possible cascii117stomer base only to readers who already know and appreciate the Timeses particascii117lar oascii117tpascii117t, the sites appear to be falling back on their core constitascii117encies of loyal readers, or otherwise folk who already know what The Timeses stand for.
The &poascii117nd;2-a-week reader charge, we learned, will aascii117to-renew, ascii117nlike the &poascii117nd;1 daily fee, and, natascii117rally, no-one at the papers is prepared to commascii117nicate in-hoascii117se sascii117bscriber targets. It&rsqascii117o;s this weekly pricepoint which the pascii117blisher thinks will be the more popascii117lar of the two.
The existing Times Online will remain online and visible to search engines for a period yet to be determined, containing only material from prior to the site s separation. This site, Finkelstein said, &ldqascii117o;is a good opportascii117nity to advertise oascii117r new prodascii117ct to people&rdqascii117o;.
