20150611首页美国著名的政治、文化在线杂志 Slate 时隔16年又重建了付费墙。1998年的时候,Slate花一年时间,拥有了20000名用户;现在,Slate 花一年时间拥有了9000名用户。用户月费5美元或者年费50美元。今天 Slate 的付费墙其实是新增的 Slate Plus 服务,原来的 Slate 仍然是全免费的。两者之间究竟有哪些差别?当年Slate建付费墙时,我恰好写过一个评论《不忠的网上读者》,可以提供一些有意思的背景。沧海桑田,物是人非。Slate 还是那样那本 Slate,还在为生存而辛苦地搏击。
不忠的网上读者?
解决方案:忠于自己
忠诚是一种十分难得的美德。在互联网上,忠诚更加宝贵。作为女人,奥尔布赖特显然算不上女神,但是,作为网上忠诚的读者,她给我留下了印象。
忠诚与不忠
1998年3月,微软旗下的著名网上杂志 SLATE(目前该杂志为前华盛顿邮报公司改名而来的格雷厄姆控股所有) 由免费开始收费,这份每日更新的高品位网上周刊全年订价19.95美元,不那么贵,但订户数还是从20万直线下降。在留下来的不足两万的忠诚的读者中有奥某(时任克林顿的国务卿)。她给迈克尔·金斯利写了一封电子邮件,说她一直追随着金斯利及他的卓见。
被奥卿这样的女性追随,对于风度翩翩的金斯利来说,说不上什么乐事;但有这样一位高层次的读者捧场,金斯利似乎有些头晕了。他在一篇随笔中引述了奥卿的邮件。
因为网上的读者,都太无情与绝情了,相比之下,奥卿是引人注目的另类。
这个插曲,提示我们两点。
一个站点,只要有个性、有品位、有追求,是可以拥有忠诚的读者的,例子就在这里。
第二点是,网上的绝大部分读者虽然对于互联网具有足够的忠诚,但对于某个站点是缺乏忠诚的。逃离SLATE的那90%就是。比如我。我很喜欢SLATE杂志。相当长的一段时间内,我每天看SLATE请的一位名记捉刀编写的五大报头条综述电子邮件版 Today ’ s Papers ,每周看其500余K的WORD格式邮件版本。但是当他开始收费之后,我就不看这本杂志了。然后,当他再次免费之时,我仍然不看。在这过程中,我找到了太多太多好看的东西,养成了无法更改的阅读习惯。虽然有时去SLATE ,仍然感到亲切,但很少再向他贡献 Pageview 了。
几乎可以肯定地讲,网上读者是不忠诚的。
这显然不是假设,有一个调研的结果很说明问题。
美国伊利诺大学1998年5月发表的一项对典型的新闻网站的研究指出:访问者仅有极少数常客,绝大多数访问者都是"过路"而已,因为没有足够多的独家材料吸引网民回头。
这项研究由Newslink ( 美国新闻学评论,美国一个相当著名的学术站点 )与伊利诺大学合作开发,由该大学著名新媒体评论家艾雷克·梅耶负责。梅耶与他的研究人员仔细观察一个美国的小型周报网站,追踪每一个访客以确定其多久来访一次,每次看哪些内容。
经过四星期的追踪,结果很不理想。利用Cookie技术及访客签名方式统计,有92%的访问者属于过路客,仅有2%的人多次来访。梅耶说,这2%的"常客"都有基本固定的访问模式。他们大多知道网站什么时候更新, 而且在更新不久即造访,并且每周所查询的多是相同的事物。
另外,根据一家大型互联网市场研究公司Engage Technologies的调查,对于一个网站而言,大约有80%的浏览者访问一次之后就不会再次光顾,而且他们35%的上网时间只是花在大约50个网站上,只有少数网站对网民的吸引力在不断增加。
为什么不忠
事实上,这符合网络这一特殊的中介体的特性。当你有500个频道可供选择时,你怎么能够让一个人忠实地守着你的那一个频道?当他不断地来回换台时,你有什么可抱怨的?
而在互联网上,可供选择的频道,不是500个,是500万。
网站建设者,必须以这一个清醒的认知为前提,来提出自己的方案与规划。这么说的原因是,好象许多网站设计师、网络创意大师们在行文之间,将这个背景完全置诸脑后了。
我愿意共享一些我的个人经验。作为一个24小时中,有7、8个小时在网上的读者,我也是不那么忠实的。
每天8点钟准时上班,我首先看邮件。邮件中某一条信息及其链接可能就把我带到了天涯海角。然后,我花十分钟左右的时间,看一下网站的日志文件。接着,我就去Chinabyte ,这是我每天都去的站点。他每天更新一次,因此,一天之内,我只去一次。按照“看报看题,看书看皮”的模式,我迅速地看完头条与头条区域的重要独家稿件,看专栏天地的独家专栏稿,看“网罗”汇编的一组简要信息。之所以首先看Chinabyte ,原因是这里有不少独家的东西。有时,一些稿子不能一目十行,需要认真学习,我就Copy & Paster , 将稿子以WORD格式存档,稍后再读。
接着,我读CPCW,读新浪新闻中心首页,读科技新闻频道,读搜狐科技,读ENET,读网易,读e 经。等等。(我也常去各传统媒体网站,但不是去读新闻,而是去看朋友。因为,他们的重要新闻,在新浪、搜狐、网易,基本上都已经碰到。)
这样在信息阵雨中淋上一个小时,就该干活、开会或做其他差事了。
我进行了一番自我反省。总体而言,我的网上访问模式,是忠实的吗?从某种角度讲,我是一个忠实的读者。上述的那些站点,我每天都会去一趟;但是,我显然不那么愚忠,我只在那个站点呆上一小会儿,如果没有我要的东西,就点一下鼠标走人。
网上浏览与我们陪夫人逛商场的概念是完全不一样的。夫人们逛商场,是地毯式轰炸,是扫描,走完一层又一层。事实上,商场你也只能这么逛,否则,你就不是逛商场了。
进入某一个商场,你要离开,是不那么容易的。门的确有好多,但几乎所有的门都在一楼。当你在商场的五楼,想离开时,你不得不乘着自动扶梯经过四楼、三楼、二楼,然后,再在一楼找到某一个出口。这么不厌其烦的描述,因为,我们正是这么不厌其烦地做的。
如果你是奔特定目标去的,那么,你从一个商场某个柜台,直奔另一商场的同类柜台,再往下一站,可是很辛苦的事情。那已经没有什么乐趣可言了。
但是,在网上逛却根本不是这么一回事。网上浏览者决不会一层一层地逛你的商场,无论你的商场多么美轮美奂,除非他是第一次来你的商场(网站)。他会很快离开。网上到处都是门。他可以直接从28楼进来,在餐厅饱餐一顿后,又从28楼离去。他浏览器中的书签,几乎就是一条飞毯,可以载着他去任何他想去的地方。
当然,最理想的模式是他(读者)在一楼大堂(首页)签到,坐电梯去16楼拜会一个朋友,然后携朋友上28楼中餐厅就餐,接着再到27楼西餐厅喝杯咖啡,稍后,又去4楼舞厅转几圈,去卡拉OK厅吼几声,吼够了,去隔壁的保龄球房一显身手。最后,在其中的某一个客房下榻。第二天,重复一次这一过程。
事实上,这不过是逗乐。你凭什么让你的读者在你的领地做完这一切?
我有一个主意:在这个网上平台中,搬进巴黎利兹广场、拉斯维加斯赌城、阿姆斯特丹水街、迪斯尼乐园、尼斯海滩以及加州好莱坞与硅谷车库。
不这样做,你没有理由与能力让人们以你的网站为网上生活的圆心。但是,要建造这样的天堂,除非你请格林斯潘来出任董事长。
忠于自己
这样的行为模式,使我对在今天(不是明天),营建网上社区,营建网上生活平台,不敢喝彩。
营建网上生活平台意味着,既要做门户,又要做(拥有)目标。这个方向不错。如果能够做到的话,问题是如何做。
网络门户现在仍然是一个热门的字眼。雅虎的一位高人这样描述雅虎:雅虎是一个机场,你去其他城市要从这里走,你从异地归来,还要从这里过。这是我看见过的最通俗易懂的门户概念。
有人对门户不满,提出了目标网站,提出了hub 概念。我想,提出这些概念的人,肯定不是拥有门户的人。目标网站与门户站点相比,当然有其优越性,看起来挺美。但是,这种美感也只是字面上的。
请告诉我,哪一个目标,是我们呆了就不想走的?playboy.com ,
whitehouse.com ,或者狄斯尼?你的身体足够好,以至你可以在whitehouse.com那种地方一直呆下去?
说目标网站很重要,我没有异议;说门户站点很酷,我赞成;如果说目标网站比门户重要,或者是门户后的标致性建筑,或者说门户比目标重要,我不那么明白。门户是什么我们都知道,那么,目标网站具体指什么?
新浪新闻中心是目标吗?当然是。你每天呆几分钟?新浪新闻中心(目标),比新浪(作为门户)更重要吗?就凭你在新浪首页呆的时间不如在新闻中心的时间长?
新浪论坛是目标吗?没有疑问。你每天呆几个小时?好象,新浪论坛(利方在线论坛)早在新浪门户出现之前就已经如雷贯耳了。先有门户,先有目标?先有鸡,还是先有蛋?
8848是目标吗?你已经在那里买了几样东西?我认识的人中,只知道有一个人从8848买了一样东西。由于种种原因,他花了49天时间,从那里买了一本书。如果他愿意,他只需花一个小时,去一趟新华书店,就可以买回那本书来。但他的经历很值,因为,他买这本书并不仅仅是喜欢这本书,他喜欢这一次实验。就此写了一篇文章,文章的稿费大于书款。
请帮忙列一张目标站点的清单,然后,我们来讨论一下,目标站点会如何左右我们的网上生活。
目标是特定的,门户是共性的。每个人有自己的不同于他人的目标(网站),你不能说你的目标重要,他的目标不重要。对于球迷来说,体育沙龙就是最重要的目标。但是,对于猎艳人来说,最重要的目标是某某聊天室。从根本上讲,只有一个人自己的目标才是最重要的、最有意义的。
我想,从上述行文中,你一定明白我想卖什么药了。门户不错,目标挺好,HUB凑合,平台也行。关键是你如何做。
身为网络中人,特别需要概念,需要营销,需要哄人。网下,CIS已经风行了多年。网上,CIS概念倒并不特别扎眼,但是,包装自己的动机十分强烈。
我总觉得,名字是符号,不值什么钱。牧丹二字中的美感,不是来自于这两个字,而是由这两个字所对应的那种花定义的。雅虎的魅力,也不是源自这两个字,而是来自那数不胜数的一条条由手工整合而成的链接与简介。
我想说的实际上只有一句话:面对不忠实的网上读者,最好的办法是忠于自己。忠于自己的理念,自己的创意,自己的设计,包括自己的概念。( 当然,如果谁忠于PUSH ,就只能陪葬了。) 因为,我们在互联网上的新生活,新媒体建设者,自己就不那么忠于自己,不那么自信。在人们揭竿而起,改弦更张之时,我是否也得跟风?
所谓忠于自己的概念是:认清自己的优势,最大化自己的优势。建立自己的绝对比较权威。集中注意力是十分必要的。无论你做的是门户还是目标,只要集中注意力,都会取得某种程度的成功。
奥卿之于金斯利,不就是这样的例子吗?
写到这里,我形成了一个想法。我将做一个笔记,将网络旗手们提出的种种新概念,做一个基本的记录,然后,每年来进行一次比照。看看,这些旗手们都举过哪些大旗,挑了几次边?这挺有意思是吗。版权所有,但可以议价出让。
( 原载 Chinabyte 1/15/2000)
One year in, Slate draws 9,000 paying subscribers
Lucia Moses @lmoses June 8, 2015
For Slate, getting readers to pay for content was going back to the future. Back in 1998, it was one of the first sites to try a paywall, which quickly failed. Sixteen years later, the politics and culture site introduced Slate Plus, a membership model — don’t call it a paywall, please — that kept the site free but offered its most loyal readers additional benefits for $5 a month or $50 a year.
The draw: members of Slate Plus get ad-free podcasts; members-only stories and newsletters; early access to big stories; and discounts to live events. A year in, the numbers are solid if unspectacular: Slate said it has gotten more than 9,000 members, which, it said, has exceeded expectations. Still, the numbers aren’t eye-opening, representing an annual revenue intake of about $500,000. Slate is private and doesn’t release financials, but that’s undoubtedly a small part of its operation.
Julia Turner, Slate’s editor, said the publisher is seeking to grow that number 75 percent in year two, having seen sign-ups increase after a recent membership push and addition of new content. At that rate, membership revenue would near $1 million, a not unsubstantial sum.
“We launched Slate Plus because we were looking to diversify our revenue, and we knew we had a dedicated core of readers,” she said. “The fact we’ve seen a doubled weekly sign-up rate is a great testament to the product going forward.”
Nine thousand might seem like a tiny number. Assuming all are paying the annual rate (Slate said that 75 percent are), that’s $450,000 a year in Slate’s coffers. On the cost side, the program requires two full-time dedicated staffers, with a third to be hired soon, and existing staff.
But it’s early days. Many publishers have adopted paid-content strategies, but most are still in a period of testing and learning what portion of their audiences will pay for content, and how much. So direct comparisons with Slate are hard to come by.
“It’s an excellent start,” said Gene Hoffman, chairman and CEO of Vindicia, a subscription-billing service. “The fact they’ve got an existing subscriber base — which is probably a good percentage of their core audience. Are they making a huge amount of money yet? No, but they’re not aggressive about putting it out there.”
It’s almost impossible to generalize about which segment of a publisher’s audience will pay and how much they’re willing to fork over, because it depends so much on the price and the offering, said Trevor Kaufman, president and CEO of paywall operator TinyPass, which has Slate as a client.
“Everyone wants to know what percentage of my audience will become a paid subscriber,” Kaufman said. “The reason it’s not that simple is, sites vary tremendously in their loyalty. You can have a ton of traffic around Kim Kardashian articles, and a very small percentage are willing to pay.”
Kaufman said that 5-15 percent of his clients’ audience usually falls into the definition of dedicated audience. To come up with that figure, the company looks at metrics including the percent of a site’s audience that has visited it three or more out of the past 30 days and have seen eight or more pageviews in the past 30 days. From there, the target is usually to convert one-third of the dedicated audience to paying users. But that’s over time and refers to paywalls, which isn’t the Slate model.
The Slate Plus program is aimed at a small audience by design. The experience of a hard or metered paywall like The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times, two of the most famous paywall examples, doesn’t really apply. In those cases, people are cut off from content if they don’t subscribe, so you would expect a relatively high rate of sign-ups. At The Times, for example, which has a metered paywall, core digital subscribers represent about half its total paid circulation.
Slate kept its existing site free, though, so you would expect the uptake to be lower. Its approach is closer to that taken by The Guardian last September, where it kept the site free but gave people the chance to pay for discounts and access to events, £15 ($22) or £60 ($91) a month, depending on the level of membership. (The Guardian wouldn’t say how many paying members it has.)
The thinking at Slate is that getting those loyal readers to pay will not only generate revenue to fund more journalism but will foster a stronger connection to those readers who can be advocates for the publisher. It’s a strategy that runs directly counter to the scale chasing that has become common at many digital publishers today — and has given rise to extreme traffic measures that are of questionable value to advertisers.
“There’s incredible pressure to show growth in unique users which means attracting people to the site that have never been there before,” Turner said. “If sites aren’t careful, they can neglect the interests of their most loyal readers. We are an ad-supported business and expect to remain that way, but finding a way to connect with our core audience that will allow us to do things that are editorially innovative is what’s most exciting about Slate Plus.”
Slate has also used the past year to learn which benefits were most popular as it considers how to make the program stronger in year two. It saw that podcasts and behind-the-scenes articles and insights from individual writers did especially well, so it added some bonus podcasts. But people didn’t love hearing the promo language at the beginning of the podcasts, so Slate axed that. Also less popular was a new commenting technology that was debuted on Slate Plus that lets people chime in at any given part of an article.
Based on that feedback, Slate hopes to grow memberships by broadening its appeal with new content. A big component of this will be access to a new offering, Slate Academy, a collection of podcasts and articles that go deep into a subject area. The first, launched three weeks ago, focuses on the history of slavery in America. Other, still to-be-decided topics, will follow.
“People are happy with it as a product, and they respond particularly to content,” Turner said. “So the strategy for the second year is to do more of the stuff they like already and use Slate Plus as a lab to experiment with different types of products.”
网友评论