South: The major "pro," of course, is revenue: It's expensive to report the news, and news organizations need an adequate income stream to do the job. It seems discriminatory and counterproductive to charge some readers (people who buy the printed newspaper) and not others (online readers).
The major "con" is that charging for online news will drive away many readers; too many people expect online information to be free. Another con -- or at least a challenge -- is that news organizations must find an easy way to charge (probably some kind of micropayment system).
If newspapers waited too long to do something, maybe it was to explain to people why this free model isn't sustainable. We should have been warning people that the day of reckoning would eventually arrive ... that, in fact, you get what you pay for.
Crocker: Will charging for online content bring people back to print editions or push them to news sites such as CNN, Fox, and other network news sites? Or will charging create a domino effect, where those sites will begin to charge?