'On Line Opinion' - the next iteration

How do you make online journalism pay? On Line Opinion might be a not-for-profit but it’s never been uncommercial in its approach.

If we are going to provide a platform where ideas can meet, then we need to make enough to cover our costs and to allow for reinvestment in technology.

On Line Opinion is unique in Australia as a journal which holds no particular political point of view apart from the one that the free exchange of ideas is absolutely necessary to a functioning society.

We also seek out writers for their knowledge, not necessarily their ability to turn out polished prose, and cover a wider gamut of points of view and subjects than anyone else.

When we started 11 years ago there was no commercial model for what we were doing. But we knew that if people were interested in reading good quality, insightful material someone would have to get paid somewhere, somehow.

So our job was to run as lean and mean a budget as possible, and to deliver as high a quality as we could within that budget, so that we could last long enough for the model, or models, to shake out.

In our field we’re still waiting for that to happen. And while we were waiting we were burning capital. Now we’ve got to a position where that has to stop.

As of next week OLO will be running on an even leaner mix, but with that mix we are hoping to give you something even richer.

I can’t give you full details because I don’t have them.

The original OLO concept was predicated on the interactivity of the Internet, something which is now labeled Web 2.0.

So you won’t be surprised to find that in our redesign we will be trying to harness the power of our community to make our site better and stronger.

And when you have told me what we are doing, I will dutifully let you know.

In the meantime we are cutting costs. It’s what we have to do to handle the situation.

This means that Susan Prior, who has lovingly and enthusiastically nurtured and pruned contributors’ work for the last six years, will be standing down as editor. If you know of someone who needs a quality person with quality skills, then Susan is looking for full-time work.

She started as an intern while studying at USQ raising two daughters on her own and looking for a new career. She commuted 128kms from Toowoomba once a week to do it.

I will be stepping into the position of full-time editor, something that I haven’t done for maybe eight years. To make this work, because I have a wider range of responsibilities than just editing, we are going to revert to some earlier ideas. Ideas like using “volunteer editors”, who were editors who helped with some of the more difficult jobs, like adapting interesting speeches into op-ed articles.

This iteration we are looking towards an editorial panel which finds articles and interesting contributors as well as helping with some of the more difficult editing.

There are a number of reasons why we are taking these steps.

Before the GFC advertising looked like it could meet all of our modest needs. After the GFC our advertising revenue declined precipitately. On Line Opinion on its own serves around one million ads a month. We also have a network of blogs - those sites on The Domain - where we get a small share of the advertising revenue. There are generally around another 1.5 million ads served there.

Huge as this may sound, it is not enough to pay a full-time salary.

We were able to carry some of the loss because we were also building websites. But activity there tailed-off as well (although it appears to be coming back).

Another reason is competition from rivals. Our readership has declined slightly over the last two years as The Punch, The National Times and The Drum have grown their readerships.

They don’t exactly compete directly with us, but they do provide other platforms where people can discuss politics, and there are only so many hours in the day where you can do this.

What is the future for On Line Opinion?

We need to expand what we are doing. There are still many things out there that the net can do for open discussion and interaction with politicians that it isn’t. That means a site redesign with better, more efficient and more open architecture with some new features.

Not only will we be talking to readers about this, but we will be looking to raise some money to do it. I have a working budget of $30,000 in mind. We envisage raising the money from readers and other organisations.

Part of our fundraising will include regenerating our membership program. With our combination of publishing and research there is a lot that we can offer other organisations in a variety of fields.

We are also looking at ways of increasing the advertising revenue. We have a unique audience which should be valuable to people or organisations who want to get to people who are politically active. At the moment we get most of our advertising via advertising agencies, but that market doesn’t seem to properly value our audience.

So we are looking to source advertisers directly.

And we are also looking for more paying gigs. We do build very good websites, and we get paid for our research from time to time. An increase in this business would help to put us on a sounder footing.

What will this mean to you as reader? Very little in the short-term. We will still publish our six or so articles a day and they will come from as diverse sources as possible and give you real information.

But over the long term a lot of things are going to change. Being forced to live within our means is actually incredibly invigorating. I’ve revisited ideas that I haven’t looked at for years.

On Line Opinion was extraordinarily visionary when it first appeared, a few months before Crikey. There are dangers in being the first mover.

But now the Internet era has well and truly arrived, and some of the vision that had to be put to one side in the interests of longevity can now be dusted off and paraded publicly.

In this new political and technological paradigm, the times should suit us more than they have.