Why I Pay for Content on the Internet
Published December 11, 2003
The James J. Hill Reference Library is an outstanding resource for anyone who needs access to business data. And it proves that people WILL pay for content on the Internet.
The "JJ Hill," as it's called, is located in Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA. According to its website it has a "world-class collection of practical business information resources and is considered one of the most comprehensive business libraries in the country."
The JJHill has positioned itself as THE reference library for small businesses in need of industry and business information.
Like any library, it has a traditional brick-and-mortar facility in Minnesota. But I don't really care about that, as I am in Cleveland, Ohio (nearly two hours away by plane for those of you less familiar with North America). I'm not going to be visiting the JJHill's facility anytime soon — maybe never.
What attracted me is JJHill's online service, augmented by telephone, email and fax services. They've created a service that allows me, sitting in front of my computer, to have access to their considerable resources, without leaving my office.
For an annual subscription of about $600 (USD), a subscriber gets:
I've had people ask me why I pay for content when supposedly content is free on the Internet. However, that's a big fallacy. Sure there is a lot of free content out there on the Web. But is it content that is truly valuable to businesses for critical decisionmaking? Like most things in life and business, there is a cost for anything good.
In my line of work, I need data and information that is precise, accurate, up-to-date, and not easy to find. About 75% of what I need is not available for free anywhere on the Internet. Yes, I can search through the free U.S. Census data, press releases, etc. any day of the week. But Census data and other free stuff only answers certain types of questions.
- Why I Pay for Content on the Internet
- Published: December 11, 2003
- Type:
- Section: Sci/Tech
- Filed Under: Sci/Tech: Internet
- Writer: Anita Campbell
- Anita Campbell's BC Writer page
- Anita Campbell's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
i will pay for content on the 'net only if i know it's worth it. And if i needed a business resource, it does sound like this site would be worth it, however the sad fact is that when it comes to sites that offer paid content, the vast majority do not offer value for money, and i believe it is because they have been set up by people hoping to make a fast buck, who haven't actually spent much time making their site and content worth paying for.
I will go through great lengths to not pay for the newspaper that gets delivered to my house, but they always manage to track me down.
Information is never free, it's just that sometimes we can find someone to subsidize our cost.
Bruce, great observation. One way or another someone somewhere pays for the information we consume, whether directly through subscriptions, or indirectly through tax dollars to support libraries or conduct census surveys, or through being bombarded with annoying ads, or.... Anita
I've never paid for content on the Internet, but my demands are different from Anita's -- I'm not in business and anything I've ever wanted (within reason) I've always been able to get for nothing. When, like me, one of your main demands from the Internet is good reading material, it remains a very dicey proposition as to whether people will pay for content.
Look at two of the long-competing online magazines, slate.com and salon.com. Although backed by Microsoft, Slate had a long-term goal of becoming a site that could eventually pay for itself with annual subscriptions, but that proved to be a complete non-starter; as founding editor Michael Kinsley eventually put it, "people are too damn cheap." More than that, I think in order to charge money a site has to have something to really sell -- something people simply can't get anywhere else. The JJHill site is probably a good example, as is the payy-only Wall Street Journal. Good writers and good journalism aren't enough -- because there is so much good writing and good journalism on the Internet that costs nothing. The same goes for poor old salon.com, which became a pay site and spent many months -- most of it on life-support -- begging someone, anyone to pay to read what they offered. They still do, although they now have this deal where you can get a "free day pass" if you agree to sit through the on-line commercial of a sponsoring company, which I frequently agree to do.
I think in terms of magazines and newspapers, paying for content remains a bit of a dream.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/10860)
I will go through great lengths to not pay for content on line. I'm too used to being able to find all I need for free.