Despite the many threats to news subscriptions, opportunities still exist, and during INMA’s Subscriptions Town Hall, Greg Piechota looked at both. 

Piechota, lead of the Readers First Initiative and INMA’s researcher-in-residence, acknowledged that certain threats exist, dispelled the ideas of others, and ultimately offered hope for news media companies to achieve more growth in the year ahead.

Of all the industry’s challenges, Piechota said attention loss is one of the most pressing threats to newspaper subscriptions.

Many countries, including Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, have seen a decline in consumers who are interested in news. And surveys show a growing number of people are avoiding the news, often citing feelings of being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information. 

While earlier data found this trend was more common amongst those who were less educated, poorer, and less interested in politics, that is changing: “I read stories at The Washington Post and The New York Times about even educated people and rich people and people interested in politics turning off the news after the elections,” Piechota said.

However, when Piechota looks at performance data from publishers, the notion of a “subscription ceiling” — in which there is a limit to the number of people willing to pay for news — appears to be more myth than reality, he said. 

Data from 255 news brands worldwide shows no clear evidence of subscription fatigue: “When you look at the number of digital-only subscriptions in the past five years, it tripled,” Piechota said, adding that the rate of new subscriptions sold per million users each month has doubled. 

Churn rates also have remained low, averaging around 3.7% in the last quarter — significantly lower than the churn rates seen in video streaming services, he said.

“Subscription fatigue is a little bit like Nessie in Loch Ness,” Piechota quipped. “It’s a monster everybody talks about, but nobody has seen it.”

Room to grow

The market penetration for digital-only subscriptions also indicates substantial room for growth, Piechota said, noting national brands have a median average penetration rate is around 0.9%, with market leaders like Corriere della Serra in Italy reaching 2.3%, Dennik N in Slovakia at 3.5%, and New Zealand Herald achieving a 5.4% rate. And The New York Times has achieved an 8% penetration rate. 

These figures suggest the potential market for digital subscriptions is far from saturated. In Estonia, for instance, the leading news company has a penetration rate of 18%, demonstrating that higher levels of market penetration are achievable.

“There is no ceiling,” Piechota said. “You are nowhere near the ceiling.” 

Historical data further supports the argument that there is significant untapped potential in the subscription market, he added. Comparing the number of newspaper subscriptions from 20 years ago to current digital subscriptions reveals a 4.4x gap in online penetration. 

Piechota’s belief that there’s room to grow is shared by industry leaders like A.G. Sulzberger, publisher of The New York Times, who told Reuters Institute that the industry is thinking too small. He pointed out that half a century ago, there were 200 million newspaper subscriptions in the United States, compared to today’s 30 million to 40 million, suggesting considerable room for expansion.

Surveys conducted by the Reuters Institute in Oxford also show the growth potential. In 20 countries with mature subscription markets, an average of 17% of consumers reported paying for online news at least once. However, when asked if they would consider paying if the price and product were right, 36% said they would. 

“This means that there is, on average, three times growth potential across those 20 major markets,” Piechota said. “And basically, most consumers either are paying already or can consider paying if the offer is right.”

Even Norway, which. according to the Reuters Institute, has the highest penetration of paid digital subscriptions (40%), has room to double its penetration, Piechota said. And that makes a strong argument for a reader revenue strategy for 2025: “It’s a proven revenue model. Globally, more money is made with customers paying for online news than with advertising in general.”

Pros and cons of reader revenue

The strengths of a subscription-based revenue model are clear, Piechota said, as subscriptions provide a stable and predictable revenue stream. That allows media organisations to plan and invest in content and product development. Recurring payments simplify the process for consumers and reduce the cost of sales for publishers. 

However, there are weaknesses to consider, such as the cyclical nature of the demand for news, which is often driven by major news events. Many current subscription products are optimised for heavy users, such as political news enthusiasts, rather than casual readers. 

To grow, media organisations must diversify their content to appeal to a broader audience, including younger readers who prefer multimedia content and social experiences.

Looking ahead to 2025, publishers have several opportunities for growth in the news subscription market. 

• Advances in Internet technology and AI allow media organisations to reach new markets more efficiently.

• Direct relationships with readers enable data collection, which allows for personalised content and pricing strategies. 

• Additionally, a diversified revenue model that includes both advertising and subscriptions can help media organisations achieve profitability more quickly and offer competitive pricing.

However, there are also significant threats, such as news avoidance driven by political and societal crises. And the rise of content creators, streaming services, and AI-generated content increases competition for attention, making it harder for traditional news organisations to stand out, Piechota said.

“There is a rising competition for attention. We compete no longer with other news publishers; we compete with Spotify, with Netflix, with all kinds of services. And this basically pushes the cost of acquiring and maintaining attention. We just need to invest more in marketing.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .