Significant money for content is only available for "premium" content: ie where it's particularly timely (eg stock info), highly specialised (eg medical journals) or vital to job performance (tax tables, law etc).
While there are parallels to this premium approach online, there is a further category of information that is valuable - "actionable information". This content is neither static nor reactive but rather aids users in achieving something. More akin to workflow/decision-tree/diagnostic tools than an HTML version of pages of A4, this content 'works with' the user and delivers demonstrable benefits.
My company runs services that "make informational transactional" and we're experiencing not only a strong demand from the information sector but also good responses from users.
Provided that people are inventive, consider the basics of their pricing model and manage to equate value with cost I genuinely see no reason for content to be ever 'free'.
ikj
Initiatives that start to make users realise that you have to pay for quality content should be welcome. If online content is to thrive its real value should be reflected by a price users should pay. The sooner "subsidised" content disappears from the web, the better.
The answer is that in Italy online contents are not considered as a new communication strategy. They can be at least a "second rate" articles or something like this, and the online publications seem to be duplicates of the print ones.
