Friday, April 08, 2005 12:28 PM
Wired is
reporting that a number of big newspapers, including the
LA Times and
Denver Post, will be launching their own standalone versions of RSS feed readers very soon.
According to the article, the Denver Post is going to re-brand NewsGator. I had never thought of this, but I wonder if the Post will give away its "version" of NewsGator for free, and then embed advertising and links to items like subscription information and similar into the framework of the reader itself. In a sense, create a virtual newspaper in every user's Outlook that mimics its traditional printed paper.
Taking this thought I step further, it seems plausible that traditional offline media could use the newsreader as their platform for connecting to the world of online readers. There is likely little if any money to be made from selling newsreaders in the long-term. However, there may be money to be made in delivering advertising, generating new subscriptions and selling premium paid feeds via the newsreader.
Here is another thought that comes to mind. At present, I think it is fairly accurate to believe that 90% of the world's lawyers are not using a feed reader. I think it is also fairly accurate to say that all of the major players in the legal vertical are looking to improve the connections between the user's desktop and their lineup of web-based services and offerings. Now, most of the lawyers that I know have two applications open every day: Word and Outlook (surprising to some perhaps, a web browser is a distant third). So, connecting to these applications are essential. If a company can get access to either of these applications, they will greatly increase their exposure.
Hypothetical: With this in mind, what if tomorrow Lexis offered a free branded version of the Newsgator Outlook plugin to any and all interested lawyers and researchers? It could be set up to look like any of the "My" web-based services already out there (my.yahoo.com; my.findlaw.com, etcetera). However, similar to those web-based services, while it would give the user control over what news and information they displayed, etcetera, it would also reserve certain "spaces" to advertise and market its own premium services and offerings. Perhaps Lexis would also charge other legal publishers and companies for access--via the "Lexis" newsreader--to this audience.
Ask any vendor to the legal vertical how difficult it can be to get their products and ideas in front of decisionmakers at law firms. Especially as information overload simply keeps increasing. A communication channel via Outlook (and Word, for that matter) could ultimately be a valuable commodity.
Last question. Would you rather be the company that takes the lead in delivering branded newsreaders to users...or the follower? Maybe the above is all "pie in the sky" theorizing. But, on the other hand, what if the LA Times and Denver Post are right?