Abstract
Most traditional newspaper publishers provide online editions to counter the competition of online news providers. However, the relationship between the online and print editions of the same newspaper has not been clearly defined. Some see the online newspaper as a substitute, while others consider it a complement. A 2002 NAA online newspaper consumer survey indicated that one-third of its respondents said they were now using the print newspaper less. Others have argued that the online edition will not wipe out print consumption, and may even complement it. While the print edition offers particular advantages such as portability, less eye strain, and the tactile experience of a printed page, the online edition also offers specific advantages such as access to breaking news, continually updated information, access to old archives, etc. All these factors would tend to lower the degree of interchangeability between the products. However, recent empirical studies show that the online edition is a substitute for rather than a complement of the print edition. Still, to some print readers, the online edition provides additional value. In this paper, by capturing the two different aspects of online editions the substitute aspect and the additional value added aspect as well as other available online alternatives, we develop an analytical model to derive the optimal production and distribution strategies of both online and print editions. Confronting the "free versus fee" issue, we show that it is optimal to provide an online version of the print newspaper for free to non-print subscribers. However, the amount of free news content that the publishers need to put on the Web depends on the available alternatives on the online market. The "fee" and "free" options both have merits and demerits as well. If the publisher charges for the online version of the print newspaper, she can generate revenue from the fee charged to online readers. However, doing so will limit the size of the online audience and further reduce online advertising revenue. At the same time, by providing a high-quality online version and charging for it, the price of the print newspaper must stay low in order to lure high valued readers. On the contrary, if the publisher provides an online version of the print newspaper for free, she can obtain a larger audience for the online version. At the same time, by providing a low-quality online newspaper, the publisher can increase the print newspaper price to get more revenue from high valued offline readers, although no revenue is incoming from online version readers. Through systematic measuring of all the pros and cons, our analysis shows that the optimal option is not "fee" but "free."
