Is It Time To Start Charging For Quality?

Last week The Wall Street Journal reported that The New York Times will begin charging for access to their website.  I don't think the news is any surprise as many major media and news publishers have struggled with ways to increase revenues from both their physical and online products. However, I read a blog post, discussing the news, that raises an interesting question: will only the rich get high-quality news online?  At first glance it seems like a legitimate question, but does paying for something really means only the rich have access to it? I don't think so.  What if all news outlets charged? would it happen then? I doubt it.

I, like any other person, enjoy free stuff... but, I also enjoy quality; I'm willing to pay for things I expect to be of high-quality(HQ).  If I do so for most things, why not for content? after all I pay a lot of money for college books and some of them have content that is of questionable quality.  I think that people in the online world have grown used to the "free" business model and therefore feel that charging for content is bad. Furthermore, this consumer mentality could be the reason why so many paywall revenue attempts have failed.  However, is that the fault of consumers or businesses? this comment is right on point: 

"paywalls dont work when you are the only one doing it. row after row of free lemonade stands it is hard to charge a dollar for a glass. but the free lemonade stands dont last forever especially with the decline of income from print. it is a question of timing not of a failed concept."

So if it is a question of timing, is now the right time?  If one pays close attention to services provided online, be it content or SaaS, one can see a rising trend of subscription and freemium based business models.  This a non-scientific indicator that customers are getting used to the fact that if they want something "better" they'll have to pay some money.  There will always be free alternatives, but one needs to understand that it costs money to produce HQ products in both the physical and online world. 

Will only the rich get high quality content? No, but it might come to the point that one will have to pay something for it.  In my mind there are two specific scenarios that could play out:

1. Most if not all news/content sources will rely on some sort of subscription-based business model.  Consumers will determine which source provides content with quality at or above the expected quality for the subscription fee.  The source who do not meet the criteria will fail and become free again or will cease to exist.
2. Freelance writers and/or consumers in general will create their own quality news sources out of necessity.  People might be willing to collaborate to produce quality content --Wikipedia-- for the benefit of humankind.  Just imagine when good writers collaborate to create their own news outlet.

Where are we headed? well no one knows for sure, but I think we are at the right time to start charging for quality news/content.  I think that The New York Times will be somewhat successful at first and will eventually figure it out.  Will there be free quality content out there? I think that there will always be someone out there willing to provide quality in exchange for something other than money.