Catherine Bennett seems not to understand the economics of her own industry.
\”It proved scant consolation to the frugal camp that, reading him online, they had not contributed a penny towards his upkeep.\”
You know, you might want to have a word with the money side of GMG there.
There are advertisements on this page, as there are on all other pages of the site. GMG does receive money for showing those advertisements to us readers.
Sadly, no, I don\’t know the exact figures for GMG. I do know some rough ones for similar sites. £10-£20 per thousand page views perhaps? No, not per ad, but the cumulative payments for the several ads which are on each page?
So, if George is paid £60k a year, he needs to provide 6 million page views per year to cover his direct cost. Yes, this is ignoring the infrastructure cost and so on, merely illustrative.
125,000 page views per weekly article. No, I don\’t know whether he does do that but it\’s certainly entirely achievable. In fact, I\’d be amazed if George wasn\’t providing 6 million page views a year to The Guardian site. After all, a simple personal blog out there can do over 1 million a year (mine does).
I have to admit I\’m always amazed by journos who don\’t seem to know where the money comes from. The cover price of a newspaper or magazine usually just about covers the printing and distribution costs. Paying for the actual content has always come from selling the advertising. Now we read online (no print or distribution costs, or at least comparatively low ones) but we still see the ads which the newspaper gets paid for.