Myth | Internet = free content

I've been thinking quite a bit about the hot topic of subscription services and pay walls... not just because it's a hot topic within digital publishing, but also because it's a topic of an upcoming panel i'm on at Digital Hollywood:

http://www.digitalhollywood.com/10DHSpring/DH10Sp-Wed21.html

Regarding pay-walls and pay-per-article services (specifically like the one that the New York Times is considering). Has any pay-per-use model ever been that successful? You want customers to consume as much as your content as possible: THAT's called engagement. But by charging them per article, it encourages them to find that content in another form. Remember the old days of AOL, when user's monthly bills were hundreds of dollars (for the many hours they spent online). It may have helped AOL's revenues for the short term, but it didn't do them any favors in the long-term (and gave rise to newer business like Earthlink and flat-rate Internet ISPs). Quickly AOL turned to a flat-rate monthly amount (with a variety of subscription models).

I think publishers need to find a way to ENCOURAGE users to consume content, without charging them a "per-use" fee. It's detrimental to the behavior they are trying to encourage.