OpenID Gets Closer to Real Usability

Until recently I hadn’t been impressed with the so-called “seamlessness” of how OpenID was going to make life easier for actual users trying to register on Web sites. But things may be starting to come together. RPX, for example, has commercialized a very easy OpenID login/registration interface. If you want to see it in action on a live site, go to UserVoice and register. It’s now not so hard to imagine a world where we have one identity and one password, linking not just all our social networks but all the content and commerce sites we have relationships with.

Now let’s use the same open-standard approach to make it easier for one e-commerce relationship to grant us easier access to premium content across sites, without having to make multiple individual subscription purchases.

(And by the way, if you are a connoisseur of elegant registration/purchase screens – you know who you are – UserVoice’s are beautifully designed, well engineered, and short.)

It’s Dumb to Charge for Some Sites, But Brilliant for Others

Once again there’s active talk about some new plans to charge for NYTimes.com:  one model where only heavier users of the site pay for the privilege (as in FT.com’s system), and what is described as a “membership model,” where you’re paying for, well, various as-yet-undefined benefits of being a Times “member,” not just for news.

I am someone who has long thought it’s a little crazy for a fabulous brand like the Times not invent something they can charge for online. But plenty of observers still regard every sign that a newspaper is going to charge for content as a pathetic move that’ll never work. In some cases, that’s clearly true. But there’s an actual chance of success if publications approach the question, not as “How do I start charging for what we’re doing online?”, but instead “What do I have the skills and relationships to put together that is worth money to people?” Deliver enough utility, exclusivity or entertainment, and you’re crazy not to charge for it.

Even this idea of a “membership” isn’t as lame as it sounds. Why not try to build multiple benefits into an annual fee? Yes, there have been plenty of “affinity” programs — even the Times had some useless subscriber “benefit” card a few years ago. But these programs need to go beyond the usual 10%-off-your-second-entree-before-6PM discounts people will never use. Why can’t a local publication put together a package of genuinely valuable privileges — local music, wine tastings, networking, food events, mobile alerts, guides, handbooks — one that would make buying an annual “membership” a no-brainer? Surely there are enough advertisers everywhere right now who are desperate enough for qualified leads that they’d get on board with something innovative.

Putting a subscription wall up in front of a not-very-useful product won’t work. Designing some kind of a package of information and other benefits that delivers enough value that you’d leave it on your credit card, year after year — well, publishers are dumb not to invest in figuring out what that might be.