Build The Wall

The article, Build The Wall, is available here on the Columbia Journalism Review website.

1) Summarise each section in one sentence:

• Section 1 (To all of the bystanders reading this…)

Discusses how content needs to be payed for.

• Section 2 (Truth is, a halting movement toward...)

Looks at how we need a paywall.

• Section 3 (Beyond Mr. Sulzberger and Ms. Weymouth…)

Debates the positives and negatives of having a paywall. The positives outweigh the negatives.

• Section 4 (For the industry, it is later than it should be…)

Looks at the possible scenarios in which journalism may change with the digital revolution.

2) Summarise David Simon’s overall argument in 250 words.

David Simon suggests that content needs to be paid for; paywalls are necessary for online publications. For there to continue to be free, high-quality journalism, it cannot go unpaid for. If we fail to realise this, this free information's reliability and quality will significantly drop. This is why we need to fund this kind of data through some kind of subscription system. Again, if not, the concept of news and its value will decrease. People won’t value it as much. However, if it is paid for, people will feel that they are getting their money’s worth for high-quality journalism. Gradually, this means there will be a profit seeing as the demand for the news will always be relevant. If all news becomes something that needs to be paid for, it will become more valuable in society. 

3) The New York Times added a paywall in 2011 - two years after David Simon's essay. Read this summary of the New York Times's paywall - why does the writer suggest the NYT's paywall was successful?
The NYT was so successful, accord to David Simon, because of their high quality, in-depth journalism. Their paywall involved a subscription model which allowed users to view 10 free articles a month, however, once this limit was reached, they would have to pay for the content. 

4) The Washington Post followed with its own paywall in 2013. Read this article about the launch of the Post's paywall. List one strength and one weaknesses of newspaper paywalls that the article discusses.  

One strength of the paywall is that the content paid for will be more valued. One weakness is that they will lose a lot of readers.

5) Read this Guardian comment by AC Grayling piece on the state of journalism that was published the year before David Simon's essay. What references to new and digital media can you find in AC Grayling's argument? Overall, do you feel the comment piece is positive or negative about the influence of new/digital media on the newspaper industry?
Even though the article does make mention of the more negative aspects of the influence of new and digital media on the internet, it's shown that the positives are still valued more than them. In essence, we 'just have to put up with this.'

6) Finally, what is your own opinion? Do you agree that newspapers need to put online content behind a paywall in order for the journalism industry to survive? Would you be willing to pay for news online? Critical autonomy is the key skill in A2 Media - you need to be able form opinions on these issues.
Personally, I feel that the idea of a paywall is a damaging feature to add to reading the news. It will damage the industry as people use the news online because of it's cheap, quick accessibility.