A new system yes, although I can't see that new system being developed by the traditional publishers becuase they are blinded by their past success and are clinging to old ideas in the vain hope that things will get better or will go back to the way they were.

It is all about economics, and the old newspaper economics simply don't work in the new age.

The old newspaper publishers business models involve charging high fees for advertising. Newspaper and magazine cover charges only pay for distribution and retailing of the newspapers and probably do not even contribute to printing costs. Traditional newspapers need to charge high fees in order to cover their high operating costs and to satisfy their shareholders requirements for high returns on investment.

The old newspaper publishing model requires that advertisers individually or cumulatively pay thousands of dollars per newspaper page per day in advertising fees, whereas few advertisers will be prepared to pay such high fees to advertise online, where all advertising will be commission based.

I am a web application developer and my company already have systems developed and in place that provide the ability to put millions of businesses online for little more than the cost of hosting, and bandwidth and hosting and bandwidth costs have fallen dramatically over the past couple of years.

We are not the only people who have such systems already developed and operational, and we are already using those systems to successfully promote clients online. Google is great for doing this, although Google is not the only possible solution.

Newspapers are missing out on opportunities to retain their value to society and remain profitable, although in order to do so the newspaper proprietors would need to completely reinvent their business models and there are possibly too many vested interests in the newspaper industry to enable that to happen.

What is more likely to happen is that newspapers will fail because of their inability to effectively adapt to the new medium. Once the newspapers fail in sufficient numbers over the next two years, the hundreds of thousands of new media developers will step into the void (are already stepping in) and will through trial and error establish new forms of media as is already happening.

All businesses will then accept that their is no alternative to advertising online and all consumers will accept that the Internet is the only viable means of accessing information.

The current global economic turmoil is contributing to the required changes. This is not just an economic downturn, it is a once in 500 year economic tsunami that will sweep away the old economic models and leave a clear landscape on which enterprising individuals and organisations will build (are building) new economic models in media and in distribution.

It is a little over 500 years since a man name Johannes Gutenberg unleashed a similar tsunami through the development of movable type which enabled the printing industry to grow and completely changed society by providing greater access to information to people who were previously illiterate. Within a few years the print publishing industry put monastic scribes and feudal lords out of business.

The tsunami unleashed by the Internet will have a far greater impact on society and on economies than the one unleashed by Gutenberg.

@David and Keith - guys, you are mixing everything up - the converstaion is NOT about the quality of the sold content BUT about a new sytem that will generate revenue for publishing companies… I myself do NOT watch BBC - for the same reason you do not… too much rubbish, and no real worthy reports or news…(you have choice to watch or not to wtach, to pay or not to pay…)

Put the content aside (assume it is a quality one) people WILL pay for the info.  If all big quality content generating companies will charge and there will not be any other good source to get the news online - people will PAY!

Another question is the QUALITY of what is being sold or not sold.  Online there is LOTS of free rubbish too…well perhaps it will stay as such - free rubbish…

NO NO NO… News Corp/Murdoch.
As usual they are deaf to what they dont want to hear, FINE.. TRY IT..
WHO wants to pay.. the UK already pays for the BBC… by law.. IT SHOULD be free to those that pay for it. Does the rest of the world that GETS it? No? The UK news tends to be rubbish anyway, I`ve not paid for any paper for years because I got fed up with bias.. too much spin.. forget it.

No one will pay to read online content and they won't need to.

Tell Rupert that the party is over.

I do think people will pay for online content provided the price is right, the payment methods are convinient and the system of delivering content to their devices is streamlined and uniformed. Another thing if you offer something for free who would say no to it, but if it is pay or get nothing people will pay. Mo one wants to be left out.