Wordblog

Digital editions will never be an important revenue stream according to Neil Thurman of the journalism department at City University in an article on paid content strategies (pre-print version) published in Journalism Practice.

Thurman, a colleague of mine when I worked at City, and his co-author Jack Herbert, of Cambridge Publishers, say there is little reason for newspapers not to provide the service, which appears to be "an easy way of generating small amounts of additional online revenue".

They say: "Difficulty of use is a concern for newspaper managers, but in a way this allows the digital edition to satisfy the need of users who cannot access the print edition, without cannibalising circulation among users who can access the print edition."

While their wide-ranging examination of sources of online revenue reaches no earth-shattering conclusions, they suggest a better understanding of the way users make decisions and how the presence of online editions affects their decision to buy a print newspaper, is needed.

But back to digital editions and their use as a way of giving a service to those who cannot buy the printed edition. I know that the issues for trade publications like Press Gazette are not the same as those for national newspapers, but there are similarities.

Cannibalisation is a greater, and real, concern for trade papers. So recently I welcomed the PG redesign but suggested that the digital edition was not the best way of providing full online access — a subscription wall would be better.

Feeling that a blog post might not be the best way of reaching the decision makers at PG I also wrote a letter and after its publication I was contacted by Exact Editions who offered me a trial subscription.

I thank them for that but will not be shelling out £57.50 for a year’s subscription. In the past when I have looked at similar offerings I have rapidly turned away. This time I gave it a go and it provided what is the worst reading experience of my life.

By comparison, a normal PDF is a delight. There are only three size views, thumbnail, fit to screen and 100%. There is no hand tool and all moving around a page has to be done with scroll bars, unless you have a mini-trackball on your mouse.

Two pages cannot be displayed side-by-side at 100% so if a story runs across a spread, you have to go back to the thumbnails and click on the next page to continue reading. Individual stories cannot be extracted.

Digital editions can be a lot better than this. If you don’t believe me take a look at the Press Gazette’s demo and then visit the Guardian’s demo. I particularly urge anyone with a management role at Press Gazette to do this.