Should You Give Away Your Product for Free?

(Posted yesterday on our company blog)

Should you give your product away for free? Consider the Wikipedia entry for freebie marketing: “Freebie marketing, also known as the razor and blades business model, is the concept of either giving away a salable item for nothing or charging an extremely low price to generate a continual market for another, generally disposable, item.” Seems temptingly simple, doesn’t it?

The concept of free isn’t new and it’s actually not that simple. There are different models for free, including the razor blade model made famous by King Gillette; cross-subsidization; which somehow (magically it seems) shuffles cost among related products or consumer sets; and “freemium,” which provides free basic usage, but then charges for upgrades. This last model can require an alchemist’s touch, however, because you must pick the right break points and really understand the conversion process (what, for example, is the tipping point for users upgrading to a “Business Plus” or “Executive”  account on LinkedIn?).

In recent years, many marketers have been fascinated by free. Chris Anderson of Wired fame wrote a book entitled Free, but his controversial argument seems to fall apart outside the digital world where information, not tangible product, is the thing of value. When you hear “free eBook,” do you feel the same instant excitement you’d feel if someone said “free iPod?” Of course not. Seth Godin, another deep thinker on the issue of free, recently wrote the following on his blog:

In an attention economy (like this one), marketers struggle for attention and if you don't have it, you lose. Free is a relatively cheap way to get attention (both at the start and then through viral techniques). Second, in a digital economy with lots of players and lower barriers to entry, it's quite natural that the price will be lowered until it meets the incremental cost of making one more unit. If a brand can gain share by charging less, a rational player will.

What this says to me is that business is becoming a game of chicken. Company A will sacrifice margin to get more attention so it can stay alive to sell more product. This is an exhausting, but true scenario today. So let’s go back to the question about whether you should give your product (or service) away for free. I’d say no, there’s another way. Perhaps the answer is a hybrid that both Chris and Seth would say is reasonable: charge whatever you want for your product or service – treat it as a commodity – and focus your business instead on earning the most valuable asset businesses trade every day: trust.

Is trust really valuable? If you don’t believe me, check out Francis Fukuyama, whose book, Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity, argues that the U.S has historically been a “high-trust society” but that the erosion of that threatens our very economic security. We live during a time of tight supply chains and even tighter margins, and risk is everywhere. Is my food safe? Is that product well-made? Will that marketing initiative really work? When health – business or personal – is at stake, will you turn to the best price or most trusted? I’d say you’re much less likely to leave a product or partner behind because of price difference if the relationship you have with the brand or individual is based on trust, not price.

Your trust is more valuable than your product. Give that away freely, but not cavalierly. How? Start by listening to and engaging with your customers and clients. And don’t be that company that’s talked into “using social media” to sell. You won’t build trust that way. We use a methodology, FUSE, which forces us (our clients) to see themselves through the eyes of the customer. We look for ways to freely give away trust in exchange loyalty. We look for areas where a trust deficit exists and recommend ways to fill that deficit with honest, relevant, ongoing and valuable assets (I don’t say content, because I fear the word content has been cheapened to pablum status).

Don’t give away your product or service for free. You have something more valuable to give away: trust. But don’t blow it, trust is more perishable than you think!

@jason_pontin Reveals New Pay-Wall Strategy at Technology Review

Great to see a publisher clearly define a strategy for the new media era. I really like Jason's distinction between what constitutes "free editorial," what I see as the commodity every-day people can easily produce, and "premium editorial," which readers will pay for. I've dealt with this in two earlier posts: http://scottbauman.posterous.com/journalists-as-mobile-curators-a-glimpse-into and http://scottbauman.posterous.com/journalists-are-pessimistic-about-future-says. The piece below is well worth a read!

------------------------------

One year ago, I wrote a much-linked and discussed blog that prescribed "How to Save Media."

I conceded that the modes of business that had sustained publications for 300 years were vanishing, but I rejected the notion that no one knew how to turn contemporary media companies into sustainable businesses. I wrote:

"There are plenty of stupid publishers and editors, and their publications will die; but there are many smart, technology-savvy leaders, too, and their publications will prosper. While the details are still debated, the broad outlines of tomorrow's media are becoming clearer. Consumers must pay for more of what they read; publishers and the media buyers who purchase advertising must be given technologies that will make online display ads more competitive with the keyword ads that search firms sell."

I was very specific about the kinds of editorial for which readers would pay:

"Editors can charge readers for content that is uniquely intelligent; that relies on proprietary data, investigation, or analysis; that helps readers with their jobs, investments, or personal consumption; or that is very expensively designed. Everything else should be available for free, because it is news or opinion, which are commodities and must be offered up to the aggregators, social networks, and feeds. Such content can be monetized (to use the ugly jargon of our industry) only through traffic, which drives ad impressions."

I promised we would implement new strategies and create new products based on the principles I described.

For the last year we've experimented with a pay-wall for archived editorial, and we've learned a lot. Based on how our readers used that pay-wall and the principles I described in "How to Save Media," we've devised a strategy for paid editorial and subscriptions. I'm pretty certain that what we're developing will work for niche, thought-leader media companies like Technology Review (I make no claims that our strategy would work for general-interest newspapers). But I lay out Technology Review's new policies below because I want to know what you, our readers and colleagues in publishing, think. We'll amend our policies based on what you tell us.

We plan to launch the new strategy (and the products with which it is associated) in the late fall of this year.

Here is what we're going to do.

Our overarching philosophy is simple:

1. News, news-like editorial such as blogs, and multimedia should be "Free Editorial."

2. Editorial that has a higher value to readers and a longer currency is "Premium Editorial" and must be paid for by readers.

3. Editorial that is free on one platform should be free on all platforms.

4. Editorial that is paid on one platform should be paid on all publishing platforms.

5. Subscription and per-story prices should be comparable across all platforms.

Some further words on this distinction between Free and Premium Editorial. One way to think about it is: if Free Editorial will be our daily news, blogs, photo essays, and video (around 70 to 80 percent of our editorial), then Premium Editorial will be everything else. It's important to understand that Premium Editorial is not a fancy way of talking about the print magazine or the digital magazine on our various electronic platforms. Both Free and Premium Editorial stories will be individually spotlighted on all our electronic platforms in a variety of ways, and will appear in story scrolls such as the "Rivers of News." Finally, there will be Premium Editorial that can be read on our electronic platforms, but which will never appear in our print magazine or digital edition--for instance, the company profiles, econometric data, charts, and infographics of the Business Channel.

Premium Editorial stories will be clearly distinguished with icons and graphical design cues like fonts and layouts.

Each publishing platform demands a slightly different implementation of our strategy. I describe them in detail below.

The Web: A flexible meter, allowing readers access to a variable number of Premium Editorial stories for free per month. The metered number will be adjusted according to the relative strength of demand by advertisers for page impressions versus audience demand for Premium Editorial. When a reader clicks upon the link to a Premium Editorial story, if he or she is not logged in or has never logged in before, he or she will be prompted to log in to technologyreview.com by providing a minimal amount of information: a username and password. After a reader has reached the monthly story limit, he or she will be asked to pay for the story, a package of seven stories, or a digital subscription (see below).

The Mobile Web: As above.

Digital Subscription: Access to all the Premium Editorial on the Web, plus e-mail delivery six times a year of the digital edition of Technology Review magazine, plus access on the Web to all our archives, dating back to 1899. Digital subscribers will be counted as part of our circulation "rate-base," because the larger our rate-base, the higher the return from the advertising sold next to Premium Editorial stories.

Print: Delivery six times a year of the print edition of Technology Review, plus access to all the Premium Editorial on the Web, including our archives, dating back to 1899. Print subscribers will not be e-mailed a digital subscription to the magazine unless they pay an additional sum.

iPad: The app, available through the iTunes store, will itself be free. Readers will have access to all our Free Editorial. When a reader attempts to read a Premium Editorial story, he or she will be prompted to log in to technologyreview.com, and will be asked to pay for the story, a package of seven stories, or a digital subscription. On the iPad, the digital magazine is not delivered through e-mail, but directly to the platform. Readers will have access on the Web to all our archives, dating back to 1899.

iPhone: As above for the iPad, except: On the iPhone, when a reader chooses to read a Premium Editorial story, we will deliver it in the iPhone news format: no one is going to read a long story on the iPhone in a traditional Web or digital magazine layout. But for the sake of consistency, and so that we can count our iPhone readers as part of our circulation rate-base, we will still deliver a digital magazine to the iPhone. As with the iPad, on the iPhone, the digital magazine will not be delivered through e-mail, but directly to the platform. Readers will have access on the Web to all our archives, dating back to 1899.

Plastic Logic Que: As demanded by the vendor.

A final note about friction: when readers encounter the meter, there should be as little difficulty as possible. We will collect the minimum information we need to manage the meter. When a reader pays for Premium Editorial, we will prompt him to more fully complete his profile as a member of the Technology Review community, and we will use the information we collect for smart, targeted marketing purposes.

Readers, colleagues: tell me what works and doesn't work about this strategy.

Shrimp Sanibel Style - A Diversionary Post About Food (per @SamSifton )

Media_httpgraphics8ny_fhhjn

It has been too long without a food-related post. Somehow this NYT piece from the Food section was irresistible (great food writing is fantastic diversion). "Shrimp, Indonesian sambal and jalapeno, cut by lime and fragrant with cilantro." This is pure simplicity and a dish I'm sure Jamie Oliver (Food Revolution) would love to see on more tables. It will be on mine this weekend.

Journalists as mobile curators - A glimpse into the future of news.

The piece below from Mashable is interesting and will certainly draw ire from purists and, of course, established journalists. But should it? I say no. I've argued before that two types of journalism will reign in the next decade: news streams and news commentary/insight. One is fluid, fraught with flaws and, at times, questionable news gathering. We've actually come to expect that already. News commentary/insight, on the other hand, will be more thoughtful, properly sourced and, most of all, entertaining for its excellent prose (and/or directing in the case of TV journalism). The piece below touches more on the news stream phenomenon, but it suggests how both aspects of new journalism can/will benefit from an understanding of online - and now mobile - curation. Which images will help tell a compelling story? Where can I source these images? Can I find these images among every-day people? All good questions for the news person of tomorrow, regardless of whether you're feeding the stream or composing a thoughtful essay.

A great art exhibit benefits from a curator who has vision, creativity and a keen understanding of what the patron wants to see and hear. And great art exhibitions are not free. In the world of news, a well-trained curator with vision, creativity and a keen understanding of what we want to see and read will likely produce great news commentary and insight. And so it follows that great news coverage/insight in the future will not be free either.

----------------------------

GO HERE TO READ ON MASHABLE http://mashable.com/2010/05/13/mobile-tech-journalists/

 

This series is supported by The Poynter Institute’s Mobile Media blog – your guide to the intersection of mobile and media. Sign up to receive the blog in newsletter format and be entered into a drawing to win an iPad at Poynter.org/ipadgiveaway.

Listen up, journalists — your cellphone is more than just a channel by which to reach sources, your editor and sustenance (you have the local Thai joint on speed dial, don’t front): It’s an essential tool for both local news-gathering and dissemination. 

Mashable (Mashable

) talked to reporters, publications and experts in the field to get the lowdown on how your cell is affecting local news coverage. We might not be able to get you to change your ring tone — “Poker Face,” really? — but we hope we can change how you’re using your iPhone, Droid, Palm or BlackBerry.

Read on for some actionable ideas for how you can make your mobile more than just another channel by which your mother can nag you about how you should have been a lawyer instead.

An Army of Citizen Journalists

 

 

If the recent spat of natural disasters and uprisings have proven anything, it’s that when it comes to local news coverage, audience engagement is truly an asset. Although the advent of the mojo (mobile journalist) is truly upon us — journalists are increasingly using mobile phones to collect video and photos and even to file stories — we also have a veritable army of citizen journalists out there armed with their own increasingly more advanced reporting tools: mobile phones. And, as we have seen, they’re more than eager to help a journo out.

Take, for example, the meteorite that zoomed over the Midwest back in April. Immediately after the event transpired, news stations took to Twitter in an attempt to get TwitPics and footage of the occurrence. Among the most successful was local Wisconsin news outlet, WISCTV_News3, who garnered an ample collection of cellphone pictures and YouTube (YouTube

) videos.

According to News Director Colin Benedict, the rapid influx of content was due, in part, to the strong relationship the station already had with its viewers. “We use Twitter and Facebook every single day in our newscast,” he says. “Because when those big events happen, you have to have that relationship built already. We need to be in these spaces because that’s where our viewers are.”

Although the station doesn’t yet have a smartphone app -– it’s working on it –- it does have a distinct advantage when snagging this citizen footage: familiarity.

Parker Polidor — the president of Cell Journalist, a platform that allows folks to easily submit video from cellphones and other devices to local news stations –- would agree. Cell Journalist has 85 clients countrywide, and was instrumental in furnishing user footage during the flooding in Nashville, Tennessee, at the beginning of May.

“On a local TV level, this is where [local media] has a distinct advantage over all other forms of media,” he says. “When they issue the on-air call to action, they get flooded with content –- no pun intended. Over the course of that weekend, we received a little over 40,000 pieces of content submitted here in Nashville and a couple thousand in Memphis.”

By submitting footage like this to local stations, viewers and consumers feel like they’re a part of the story. “Any time a user sees their content on air, that gives them motivation to submit more content,” Polidor says. So, it would behoove the local reporter, station or paper to use social media to connect with these walking camera men and women, who make for excellent sources of information when disaster strikes.

Using Geolocation to Crowdsource

 

 

There is a distinct untapped market here when it comes to mobile crowdsourcing: geolocation (i.e. tools like Foursquare (Foursquare

), Gowalla (Gowalla

), etc). Your first thought here might be: “Why do I care who’s checking in at Chipotle at any given moment?” And we would agree — for the most part. But think about how tools like these could be used creatively. For example, Tracy Swartz, a journalist for Chicago’s RedEye paper, has found a novel use for Foursquare: She’s a transit reporter, so she scours checkins at various subway stations for news about delays, fare jumpers and track conditions.

This is only one way in which a journalist has figured out how to use the location-based tool. Now think how helpful Foursquare could be for a food reviewer (I’ve seen people mention things like vermin in checkins at various restaurants and bars), a crime reporter (I can easily see someone reporting gang activity or shots fired via a Foursquare checkin) or even an entertainment reporter (tons of people usually equates to something cool –- find out which concerts and music venues are racking up the checkins and proceed accordingly).

As more and more people get hip to Foursquare in your community –- 40 million checkins ain’t bad –- we would suggest becoming early adopters. Download this tool and start digging -– at the very least, you’ll score a mayorship and some serious street cred among the tech cool kids.

Putting Mobile First

 

 

I have a vivid memory of my grad school dean holding up his cellphone during various assemblies, imploring us to start thinking about how we’re going to get the news on “this,” rather than “this” –- the latter “this” being a newspaper. Back then, my immediate reaction was: “Ha, what? Who wants to read a story on a tiny screen?” Well, two years later, and I’m eating that thought bubble.

Although smartphone use is not as widespread among the majority of average consumers as it is within, say, the tech community — of the top five mobile phone manufacturers, only Motorola and RIM have made significant inroads in the smartphone space in the U.S. –- it is growing. And with more and more handsets and form factors on the market, the mobile space is indeed important when it comes to news dissemination (hell, the iPad sold one million units in the first month — that’s a huge market for mobile offerings right there). Still, at present, the space is a true work in progress.

Reporters and publications have to start thinking of the news in terms of “mobile first” –- i.e. Thinking about how to distribute content via mobile devices first, said Stephen Buttry, director of community engagement for TBD.com (a soon-to-be-launched digital local news operation covering the Washington area for Allbritton Communications).

“News organizations need to move quickly, and looking back on our history with the web, we know their tendency is not to move quickly,” he says. “It was easily 10 years or more into the history of news on the web that we even started hearing ‘web-first.’ … If we don’t make mobile our first priority, we’re going to screw it up like we did with the web.”

Folks like David Beard, editor of The Boston Globe’s Boston.com, have seen firsthand how quickly the news delivery landscape has changed. “When I took this job maybe two years ago, I was mostly the browser guy,” he says. “We had e-mail alerts and text alerts and not much more. Now we’re on five or six different platforms.”

Currently, Boston.com has two iPhone apps — a news app and a photo blog app called The Big Picture — and Beard says they’re doing fairly well. “We’re up triple the mobile pageviews this year from last year at this time,” he explains. Boston.com is also currently working on an iPad app.

Still, the local website, like myriad other sites, has a lot of obstacles to overcome when it comes to making inroads in the mobile space: deciding whether or not to adapt to more than one platform (Android (Android

), Palm, etc), as well as weathering the battle between Adobe and Apple.

(It would be an entire other feature at this juncture to get into the whole Flash vs. HTML debate, but suffice it to say that many publications are trying to figure out the best way to get video on mobile handsets. According to Jeff Whatcott, SVP of marketing at popular video platform Brightcove, “When the iPad came out… we actually had so many requests coming in from so many customers that we decided it would be most efficient to just book a hotel room in New York, and we did the same thing in London, to get all of our customers together. That was something we haven’t seen before.”)

Still, folks like Buttry are not impressed with most local news apps –- which aren’t really that different from their mobile sites (which are essentially the website shrunk down to fit a smaller screen). Yet he sees any local news site with an app as moving in the right direction. “I’m glad that they’re getting their feet wet,” he says. “Because those are skills and experiences they need to develop. And if the first one is pretty lame, that’s OK –- don’t stop there. Because the first news story you wrote was pretty lame.”

Taking Advantage of Location-Aware Abilities

 

 

Again, however, having an app is only the beginning of the story. What we have not yet fully realized is the location-aware nature of the mobile phone and how vital that is when it comes to delivering local news.

According to Amy L. Webb, CEO and principal of Webbmedia Group, LLC, “If you encode your content correctly –- to really be able to deliver people real-time news that’s about where they are at that moment — that’s hyperlocal news that makes sense. The problem is that most news organizations aren’t thinking that way. They’re still thinking in terms of zip codes.” What she means is that we have the ability to tie news to exact street corners, and we should be taking advantage of that.

Recently, we’ve seen several brands and publications making partnerships with Foursquare in an attempt to make ample use of geo-location. The Wall Street Journal is probably the most notable example of late. Basically, the paper’s partnership with the location-based service allows readers to collect badges for checking in at various New York locations, but –- more interestingly –- it also seeks to integrate news consumption into the game.

For example, the publication has added tips to places like Yankee Stadium that include facts about the location as well as links to stories. In fact, just the other week, The Wall Street Journal broke the news about a suspicious package found in Times Square via a Foursquare tip. Essentially, the publication is bringing us the news in a whole new way –- instead of reading stories for pleasure or leisure (via the printed page) or searching for information (via the web), The WSJ is making news dissemination about discovery.

Of course, it may be prudent at this point to recall that Foursquare only has around one million members, so it’s probably not the best way to reach your entire audience at present, but it’s this kind of innovation that people like Webb hope to see more publications experimenting with.

The same goes for aggregators on mobile platforms, which seek to bring a location-specific array of news to consumers. EveryBlock –- which is basically the granddaddy of location-based news aggregators –- has matured and developed over the years, adding a location-aware iPhone app that delivers a selection of local news to your handset. Newer services, like Fwix –- whose iPad app has been a huge success –- are seeking to do the same thing.

These services seek to provide users with the most information — from the most sources — about a given location. “Local news has to come from a ton of different sources,” says Fwix founder Darian Shirazi. “It just can’t come from one source anymore. We’ve been a central location to collect all that news together.” EveryBlock founder Adrian Holovaty would agree, “The more location-specific news there is, the better position we’re in, because we aggregate all that,” he says. “We love the fact that Twitter has launched geo-coding Tweets, because, in theory, it means there’s more geo-coded news out there.”

Still, the question, again, becomes: Will the average person use such a service? Webb doesn’t think so. “I think that people want local content for sure –- we know that they do,” she says. “The problem is that they want it in a way that makes sense to them. You can aggregate all you want, but at the end of the day, people want accessible, critical, niche local content that makes sense to them that’s relevant that depends on where they are.”

What All This Means for You, The Journalist

 

 

The fact of the matter is: Mobile technology is moving at a breakneck speed. Handsets that are hot at one moment may be completely incompatible with all the newest software a couple of months down the road. So the takeaway here is that you have to be aware of the changing landscape and adjust accordingly, but you don’t have to be a tech fiend.

When it comes to innovations and services like geo-location and the iPad and various and sundry apps, make sure that they are on your radar. Use the ones that suit your needs and at least test out the others. Casting an eye to the horizon –- while also keeping your feet square on terra firma –- is essential to staying relevant in the local news game.

Series supported by Poynter Institute’s Mobile Media blog

 

 

 

This post is part of a Mashable series providing analysis of how mobile use impacts journalism. The series is supported by The Poynter Institute’s Mobile Media blog – your guide to the intersection of mobile and media. Sign up to receive our blog in newsletter format and be entered into a drawing to win an iPad. Learn more at Poynter.org/ipadgiveaway.


For more mobile coverage, follow Mashable Mobile on Twitter (Twitter

) or become a fan on Facebook (Facebook

)

 


Images courtesy of iStockphoto (iStockphoto

), oonal, petesaloutos

[img credit: tomsun, nan palmero, edans, CarbonNYC]

 

Sample the Local Spirit - It's Time to Drink Local Too

The local food movement wouldn't be complete without local wine, beer and spirits. Craft beer is, of course, no longer a new trend; it's now brewed in nearly every major and minor city in the U.S. Wine, on the other hand, is more challenging because climate and terroir limit widespread production. Sure, you can always buy and ship grapes to non-growing regions, but the best wines are still confined to certain regions, which now include Virginia, upstate New York and Long Island in addition to the well-known regions in California, Oregon and Washington State. But it's in the spirits arena where the renaissance is most nascent. Many craft beer brewers, such as Dogfish Head, have offered small-batch rums and vodka for years, but now we're seeing more and more smaller producers set up shop across the U.S. One example, Kings County Distillery in Brooklyn, was recently the subject of a segment on American Public Radio's Marketplace [Listen Below]: 

(download)
Another example is Breuckelen Distilling, which handcrafts a tasty gin from organic grains grown in New York state. And there are probably local spirits company in your area too. Look them up!

Summer is almost here and, hopefully, this means more people will start craving locally produced goods. As that happens, don't forget the local beers, wines and spirits. The quality varies, of course, but when you buy locally you're supporting the preservation (or resurrection) of our culture and you're saying thanks to those who invest so much to keep tradition, and great taste, alive.

@Layarmobile launches “world’s first augmented reality store” (via @EuroDroid ) - This is what the mobile revolution is all about!

Media_httpwwweurodroi_axbik

Now you're talking. When I hear that 2010 is the year that mobile explodes, I'm always looking for signs of true innovation, not just the fact that more people are starting to carry smartphones (after all, isn't every phone at least marginally "clever" these days). Anyway, what Layer is doing is both innovative (what they've done with the Berlitz City Guide alone makes me giddy about my upcoming trip to Europe) and transformative from a revenue model perspective. Purchasing a new "layer" on-demand from the store provides the ideal "impulse" buy capability that will truly drive mobile adoption. It's all about valuable apps (things you'll really use), ease of payment and a great user experience. This seems to have all three. That's cool.

Science of Inequality - Finding The Mass Influentials Among Your Customers by @jaybaer

Media_httpwwwconvince_bfbex

Nice piece by @jaybaer. Agree that trying to "calculate vs. guess" who the mass influencers are around your brand is an interesting approach. I especially like the notion of isolating mobile mass influencers. This group will become increasingly more valuable over time!

Nice post Jay.

Journalists Are Pessimistic About Future, Says Pew Poll - Should They Be? (via NYTimes)

The NYT piece below isn't shocking. I don't know anyone in the media who is bullish on the future of print journalism. In fact, many are equally pessimistic about the future of traditional media outlets online. So what's the way forward for traditional media? To get at an answer, I believe we should start with a few fundamental questions:

1. What's more important, speed (with a bit of temporary inaccuracy) or accuracy (with a potential delay in getting the news)?

2. What's more important or interesting about news stories, solid writing ("journalism quality") or crowdsourced opinions?

3. Who's more trustworthy, a journalist or a person within a validated social network (e.g., a marketer on Twitter)?

4. Which would you prefer, a long column with insights and quotes from many people or reading insights from those same people individually (through blogs and Twitter streams for example)?

5. What is journalism best for in the digital age, breaking news or entertainment (long form good/great writing that you'd take to the beach)?

These are some of the questions that come to mind whenever I ponder the future of media. For me, there is a stark contrast in between a long New Yorker piece and a New York Times news story. The former borders on literature, while the latter, especially in recent years, is simply one data nugget in a stream. One you'd pay for; the other not so much. Or is that too simplistic? What do you think?

-------------------------

Among print editors, 18 percent said their papers were actively pursuing the idea of charging readers for access to their Web sites, while 58 percent said it was under consideration. Twenty-three percent said they believed that in three years, such subscription fees would be their primary source of online revenue, having overtaken advertising.

The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism polled members of two industry groups, the American Society of News Editors and the Radio Television Digital News Association. It received 353 sets of responses to the survey, conducted in December and January.

In addition, 48 percent of the editors who participated said that without a significant new income stream, their organizations could not remain solvent for more than 10 years; 31 percent gave them five years or less.

Despite that pessimism, about three-quarters of the editors who took part said they would have serious objections to accepting direct support from either the government or interest groups, and a similar number said their organizations had not seriously thought about taking donations from nonprofit groups.

In an era of shrinking newsrooms, 58 percent of the editors said journalism was headed in the wrong direction. Sixty-two percent said the Internet had changed the profession’s fundamental values, with most citing a loosening of standards.

Broadcast executives were slightly more hopeful than their print counterparts about their employers’ financial futures, but broadcasters took a significantly darker view of what is happening to the quality of journalism.

When asked why the industry was in such trouble, nearly half the editors said that in good times, the demands for profit margins were excessive, while many others said their organizations were too slow to embrace and invest in the Internet. And 30 percent of the print editors said their papers should have begun charging Internet readers long ago.

“Two years ago, we might have seen a higher number saying this was beyond our control,” said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the project. “I think there’s more awareness of innovative approaches to online business and advertising that they didn’t take but other people did, like Google and Yahoo.”