Should we have to pay to read someone's opinion?

Rupert Murdoch's plans to introduce a paywall on his online newspaper titles including Times Online, the Sunday Times and others is a bold move in the battle to combat ailing revenues. The New York Times and Wall Street Journal have tested the waters with their pay-per-view archived content, but previous attempts to make readers pay for news and mainstream content have failed. Afterall, why pay for content you can recieve for free elsewhere? This will be one of numerous issues affecting this latest attempt by Murdoch.

The Guardian's Simon Jenksins has nailed his colours to the mast in this rather bitter piece (11/09/09).

"I am delighted that you are reading this column. I am more delighted if, to do so, you bought a real newspaper, imagining it crafted by nocturnal trolls smearing ink on dead trees in a mountain cave, delivered each morning by rose-cheeked Hovis boys on bikes."

Ah, that is indeed a lovely image, Simon...

"If, on the other hand, you are reading it on screen then you are not paying for my work. You are getting it scot-free. Except for a dribble of advertising, you are not contributing to the Guardian's precarious finances, or to mine."

Alright Jenks', steady on now...

"You are also giving me the uncomfortable feeling that, if you were not reading for free, you would not bother at all. As Johnny Cash said, "Damn your eyes"."

Damn our eyes? This would be a good time to point out that it is the Guardian itself that was posted this content on its website for free. It was not C&P'd to a third-party website where unsavoury types huddle around their PC's, an evil glint in their eyes as they gorge on free news like hyena's around the rotting corpse of print journalism.

It is a shame Jenkins starts his column in such a way, as it goes on to make valid points about newspapers extending beyond the publishing of news and comment and developing their brands.

The irony however, is that it completely flies in the face of the Guardian's mantra - 'Comment is Free'. When the Guardian publish a news story or feature, they are providing a service. An unrivalled service in terms of the quality of journalism it produces, which is why I take a small amount of pleasure in buying the newspaper as often as I can, contributing in a small way at least to this fantastic and important paper. But for Jenkin's to criticise his online readership in such a way is not only foolish but arrogant. Opinion, like advice, is free for a reason.