ADVERTISEMENT



Source CEO: Pay Your Editors, Charge for Content

A report from the FOLIO: Summit.


By Dylan Stableford
03/17/2009

CHICAGO—“Content is not free.”

That was Source Media CEO Jim Malkin’s message during the opening keynote here at the FOLIO: Growth Summit Tuesday.

Malkin, who led a radical restructuring of Source’s content-creation business in 2008, was talking not only about the growing debate over paid content online, but about the people that produce that content, too—specifically, editors.

“They like to eat, they like to be fed,” Malkin said. “We have to pay them.”

Paying them, he said, is the key to keeping editors motivated, even when they’re asked to manage across a company and outside their comfort zone. “If you do your job, you get paid twice a month,” he said.

The goal of the restructuring, Malkin said, was to increase the quality and efficiency of its content, and, eventually, allow Source to charge for it.

“Readers who wish to be informed rather than entertained will pay,” Malkin said.
The restructuring was partly out of necessity. One of Source’s businesses—the brands covering the mortgage banking market—had $15 million in revenue in 2007. This year, Malkin expects it will do $5 million.

“That is not a great business model,” he said.

Source, Malkin said, is moving quickly to make its business largely subscription-based, rather than the ad-driven model that had served many publishers so well for so long. “I can’t sit there and tell my board we’re going to wait for advertising to come back—who knows when it will?”

On the state of the publishing industry, he added: “If what we have isn't valuable and no one wants to pay for it, maybe we don’t have a business.”

RELATED LINKS




Post Comment / Discuss This Story - Info/Rules

Kudos for Malkin
Submitted by Jon Mikelonis on Tue, 03/17/2009 - 14:17.

“Readers who wish to be informed rather than entertained will pay,” Malkin said. Malkin's quote is a huge step in the right direction for print media. Our small online publication has survived off of a similar attitude since '98. "The internet is primarily a research tool, show the user how to get something done with your creative and they'll pay for it. Leave the feature stories for print media." Focusing on editors (creative) rather than advertising is the right place for print media to start for a successful online switch. Jon Mikelonis www.fordmuscle.com
Masters of the obvious
Submitted by Bill Coffin on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 12:49.

Wow...so content really is king after all! Who would have thought it? Forgive me if I'm less than blown away by Malkin's radicalism. What's radical for him is merely common sense to any editor who gives a fig about the craft of making a good magazine.
Not sold
Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 03/19/2009 - 12:52.

I think the idea makes sense and he's not alone on this platform. Something I struggle with, however, is that it seemed companies (newspapers) who tried charging for content early on could not make it. Information was too readily available for free and quality sites who acquired the audience, and sold advertising based on the audience, were successful. Just because ad dollars are harder to find now, what evidence is there that asking people to START paying is going to achieve a different result than in the past?
Paying editors? What an idea!
Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 03/20/2009 - 13:31.

I'm sorry, but paying editors is a radical idea? Is he indicating that Source Media didn't pay editors before? This guy gets way too much press for a struggling company drowning in debt. And Folio buys everything he has to say without question -- hook, line, and sinker ...
Don't be so literal
Submitted by Ken Kozak on Sun, 03/22/2009 - 00:43.

Do you really think Jim Malkin is implying that he did not pay his editors? Come on. Of course that is not true. I believe he's trying to instill a belief that in order to continue making a good product, publishers need to take care of the people creating it, and not cut editors' salaries and expect them to be as satisfied with their work. As a former art director at SourceMedia, I applaud his & others' attempts at trying to change their business model. If the content is worth it, I hope businesses will pay for it. I know that in the past the New York Times has tried the online subscription model with little success, but I expect them to return to that model in the near future. I for one would rather pay a subscription fee for information from a source I trust over generic & questionable information from this week's latest blog posting. After all, GOOD content is not free. I guess time will tell if others' agree.



RECENTLY in B2B dots icon
MOST READ on FOLIO: dots icon

FOLIO: Alerts & Newsletters dots icon

Sign up for our news alerts, special offers & feature updates:






CONNECT WITH FOLIO: NOW
   



Find What You Need dots icon

Folio: Marletplace

Seach top vendors, suppliers, service providers & more

Browse & Search the Full Directory Now



CAREER CENTER dots icon

Latest Featured Jobs