Alan Mutter on why the New York Times’ meter system should not be used as an industry-wide example:

While a revenue jolt like that is sure to grab the attention of any publisher, most newspapers in the rest of country lack the substantial body of compelling, exclusive content and the unparalleled concentration of wealthy readers that are enjoyed by the Times.

What the publishers do have, however, are any number of local broadcasters and other online competitors who will be only too happy to reprise, re-report or otherwise repurpose the stories for which the newspapers hope to charge.

I couldn’t agree more. The New York Times is unfairly — and incorrectly — used in “future of news” conversations. Unlike most news outlets, the Times has valuable information, an excellent track record, and a dedication to experimentation.

The Times may very well get away with a paywall (I tend to think not, but we’ll see). A dinky metro or a local that’s 2 degrees removed from the Weekly Shopper need to be realistic — you are not the New York Times. You might aspire to that, but in moments of honest reflection you’ll see that all the “want” in the world isn’t going to get you there.

On a related note: I’ve been around both academics and journalists, and I have yet to figure out which group overvalues their work more.