Now the Financial Times is getting really bullish about its web access model. In another tweak, it’s now ensuring that no free articles are on offer to non-registered users.

In 2007, the site introduced this access model to give five free articles a month to casual readers, and 25 to free-registered users, as incentives to subscribe. But, watching its paying customers grow since then, it reduced the five free articles to one a month, and now to none.

The free articles for free-registered readers has also been reduced to 10 a month. But unregistered readers who come via Google (NSDQ: GOOG), will still get five free articles, under its adoption of Google’s modified First-Click-Free scheme.

FT.com wants readers to register for free because it gives the paper valuable demographic data with which to target advertisers’ ads and special offers for its own subscription package. It now has 1.9 million users with free accounts, which has helped it grow to 121,000 paying subscribers.

While it’s closing stories off to directly-visiting users, with First-Click-Free it’s leaving the door ajar to search visitors, however.

Analysing reader data is key to site publisher Rob Grimshaw, who told me recently he wants to be as flexible as possible with pricing options for the subscription, which costs up to £364 a year. FT.com is set to trial day and week payments via PayPal..

“We’re very keen to offer the maximum range of payment platforms,” Grimshaw said. “At moment, it’s limited; you can only pay by credit card.

“We’ve moved with PayPal first because it’s a great transaction platform and a great user experience. It’s the one which has the most potential to open up new markets for us. But there’s no reason we wouldn’t move on to other options as well. We want to be in a situation where our users can pay with their credit card, via direct debit, through their mobile, with their Amazon (NSDQ: AMZN) account, PayPal, their Google account - there’s no down side to offering the maximum number of options.”

Micropayments, also on FT’s agenda, are “more complicated from an engineering perspective” but, asked if Google Checkout could work as a platform (since many readers of merely individual articles come via search), Grimshaw said: “We’d be delighted if Google would help us out with some of those things.”

Sky has published its response to the BBC Trust’s provisional authorisation for the Project Canvas connected-TV venture.

The BBC Trust, in its announcement in December, conceded Canvas could have a “modest negative impact” on Sky and Virgin Media (NSDQ: VMED) if they did not embrace the platform.

The satcaster still considers Canvas an “unnecessary intervention which will distort the market” - but now it’s concern has turned to getting stronger measures that “adequately minimise the (market) distortions” (emphasis mine).

Because it thinks the trust underestimated Canvas’ market impact, Sky’s proposing a series of “additional requirements”, to cushion that impact - suggesting it’s accepting a possible future with Canvas, rather than just striving to prohibit it. Sky’s new proposals…

—The Canvas specification should be developed through the Digital Television Group (DTG).

—“Third party content providers should have access to the platform from launch, irrespective of business model” - this was effectively a Canvas proposal already.

—ISPs should grant fair network access to all Canvas content providers.

—BBC VOD content should be syndicated to third parties without the iPlayer brand and “without requiring distributors to carry the entirety of BBC on-demand output” (effectively meaning Sky may want some BBC VOD on either its Sky Anytime, Sky Player or forthcoming TV pull-VOD platform). BBC syndication guidelines are currently being reviewed separately.

Sky may even be envisaging a time when its own channels are on Canvas. One passage in its submission reads: “The most realistic assumptions are that Sky‟s premium channels are available via Canvas boxes and DTT.”

But Sky still reckons…
—The BBC Trust’s Market Impact Assessment and Public Value Test were “deficient” and “underestimate the negative market impact”.
—The BBC Trust’s checks against EU competition law were “deficient”. “It is wholly inappropriate for the BBC to act as a lending bank to commercial broadcasters.”
—“Proposals would constitute illegal state aid.”

It says its revenue would be hit by up to three to four percent, adding: “By way of comparison ... the Trust rejected the BBC’s Local Video proposals, with a 4% reduction in revenues described as ‘significant’.” Smart argument.

When I spoke with SpinVox buyer Nuance, as it began planning the future for the voicemail-to-text firm last month, it said it would pitch the service harder to network operators, stop offering new direct consumer accounts, but continue to maintain the service for existing subscribers.

That latter part now appears to be changing. UK users on Thursday started receiving SMS notification (how appropriate) that the service would end in seven days.

Today, Nuance sent me this statement…

“As you know, Nuance acquired SpinVox in December 2009 and, to further align with our commitment to serving our mobile operator customers and partners, we will no longer offer our voice-to-text services directly to consumers.

“SpinVox announced in September 2009 its plans to offer a free service through December 2009, and, while we have enjoyed directly offering consumers a free voicemail-to-text offering, it is our mission to offer our services to consumers as a standard feature in mobile service plans locally and globally.”

SpinVox already had several contracts to supply the service through mobile carriers before it was bought by Nuance, though none in the UK.

Many who first began using SpinVox as paying subscribers remained quite happy with it, despite the company’s financial woes and adverse publicity last year. But, while the brand is rather tainted at this point, the auto-transcription technology itself, when it’s not relying on human operators, remains well thought of, so Nuance is doing the smart thing.

At the same time, we’re hearing word of new layoffs at SpinVox’s Marlow, Cambridge, HQ. Affected staff are having one-to-one meetings this week. One report claims Nuance is “gutting” the company. On this, Nuance tells paidContent:UK…

“Nuance is continuing with the integration and consultation process in relation to the acquisition of SpinVox and therefore it would be inappropriate for Nuance to comment at this stage.”

Last month, Nuance’s EMEA marketing director Alan Ranger told me the future will be a “network operator proposition” rather than a consumer service...

“We’re not going to focus on the direct-to-consumer market. We’ll work on providing operators with a service to their consumers.” On the service’s current users: “We’ll continue to maintain it,” he added. “It won’t be a focus for Nuance.”

By Stephen Brook: Telegraph Media Group, publisher of the Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph, returned to the black last year, recording a pre-tax profit of £53.1m.

The pre-tax profit, up from a £15.7m loss the previous year, included an exceptional profit of £13.2m and net interest payable of £1.5m, TMG said in a press release.

TMG said turnover for the 53 weeks ended 3 January, reflecting the severity of the economic downturn and the impact on advertising revenues, was £317m, down 7.7%.

“Circulation revenues proved resilient, underpinned by an extremely strong and loyal subscriber base,” the company said.

TMG had an operating profit before exceptional items of £41.4m for the 53 weeks, compared with a profit of £32m for the 52 weeks in 2008.

“Despite the recessionary pressures on revenues – and a steep increase in newsprint prices at the start of 2009 – a tight control on costs, alongside the benefits flowing from the successful integration of the print and online businesses begun in 2007, enabled the group to achieve this 29% profit increase,” the company said.

TMG said in a press release that financial statements for the 53 weeks ended 3 January, were filed at Companies House yesterday. They are not yet available on the Companies House website. The additional week contributed turnover of £4.3m and operating profit of £2.1m.

TMG’s pre-tax loss of £15.7m in 2008 included a £32.9m charge from terminating printing joint ventures including its West Ferry print plant co-owned with Richard Desmond’s Northern & Shell, exceptional restructuring costs of £47.1m and net interest payable of £0.6m.

In 2007 TMG recorded a £9.9m profit.

By Mark Sweney: A senior ITV (LSE: ITV) executive has said that the broadcaster had “no plans” to do output deals to put its programming on video-on-demand aggregation services such as Hulu, YouTube, SeeSaw and MSN Video Player.

The ITV director of online and interactive, Ben McOwen Wilson, told a session at the MediaGuardian Changing Media Summit that the broadcaster would instead seek to build online viewing of its programming via its own VoD service, ITV Player.

This sets ITV apart from the UK’s other main terrestrial broadcasters, the BBC, Channel 4 and Channel Five, which have done VoD programming deals with YouTube and SeeSaw. BBC Worldwide, the corporation’s commercial arm, also has an output deal with MSN Video Player for archive programming.

“We have no plans at present to do any deals with YouTube. We are following an ITV Player-led solution because we want to push our own platform as hard as we can. We enjoyed 180 percent growth in terms of usership of ITV Player last year,” McOwen Wilson said, speaking at a Changing Media Summit session on the future of TV.

“Hulu is a major success in the US but the UK TV market is a different place,” he added.

ITV was understood to have been talking last year to the backers of Hulu – NBC Universal (NYSE: GE), Disney (NYSE: DIS) and News Corporation (NYSE: NWS) – about an exclusive content deal in return for an equity stake in the UK version of the service.

There aren’t many people left calling for BBC Online to remain its current size. So here’s one message from the commercial sector that comes as a surprise - it urges Auntie against downsizing her website…

Pact (the Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television), which also represents independent online multimedia producers that have work commissioned from the BBC and others, emailed this statement about the recent BBC Strategy Review, which proposes cutting the web budget and staff by 25 percent…

“The BBC should not be cutting its investment in digital media, said the trade body for independent producers, Pact at a meeting with senior BBC executives yesterday.

“The meeting, held at the BBC, was called by Pact to allow Pact members who are suppliers to BBC online – who make up a significant proportion of their external spend – to air their views about the proposed budget cuts to BBC online outlined in the BBC Strategy review.

“Chief executive for Pact, John McVay said: “A 25% cut to online is a backward step. Simply cutting overall budgets does not ensure it will re-focus on key public service areas or deliver efficiencies. We will be lobbying hard on this issue as part of our full response to the review, to ensure the BBC really puts quality first.”

“Another key proposal Pact made to the BBC at the meeting was to introduce a Window of Creative Competition (WOCC) in addition to the existing 25% external supply quota, as recommended by the Analysis Mason report and the Perspective Associates report which were done as part of the Government’s Digital Britain review.

“Pact will be talking further with BBC online as part of its full response to the BBC Strategy Review.”

The BBC must commission a quarter of its online work from external suppliers, so Pact members are concerned at loss of work.

But BBC future media and technology director Erik Huggers is singing from director general Mark Thompson’s hymnsheet on this. Huggers told Thursday’s Changing Media Summit…

“We have 400 top-level directories; they’re not all equally good - is that really the right way to go? We will literally cut it in half so we end up with around 200.

“We will go from a sprawling website with lots of stuff on it, some of which has never been updated, to a much more structured view of what BBC Online is all about.”

Huggers tells MediaTalk all 400 top-level domains would have to pass through three “lenses”...

“(1) Do these things meet the public purposes of the BBC? (2) Does it fit with the new focus on the five editorial priorities? (3) If it scores well against reach quality, impact and value for money, it goes on to the final stage. If it doesn’t, we’ll either archive it, delete it, remove it altogether, or consolidate it under bigger, broader products and categories.”

But he isn’t yet identifying which sites might go. There has, notably, been no campaign like #Save6Music campaign on behalf of web pages.

Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) has sold “hundreds of thousands of iPads” on pre-order, reports the WSJ, which quotes people familiar to the matter.

The vague figure could be in-line with analysts’ estimates, which guessed that first-day sales may have hit 120,000 units and that Apple sold about 152,000 over the weekend. However, with iPads still not available until the April 3 release date, it’s not clear what people are buying. The WSJ raises concerns that Apple is facing some push-back from content owners and is still frantically working on securing deals for the tablet with just weeks to go.

At a minimum, iPad owners should have access to the thousands of applications already available for the iPhone and iPod touch—it just won’t be a top-notch experience. Reportedly, Apple is still negotiating with other media companies for a price cut on TV shows that people will be able to download onto the device. To do so, Apple has had to put negotiations with newspaper, magazines and textbook publishers for the iPad on hold.

Yahoo (NSDQ: YHOO) may have lost its search deal with T-Mobile in the U.S. earlier this month—but it is still picking up search partners—at least in Europe. The company is replacing Google (NSDQ: GOOG) as the exclusive search engine on the mobile portal of Telefonica (NYSE: TEF) Espana, the biggest mobile operator in Spain. Under a two-and-half year old partnership with Telefonica, Yahoo was already the exclusive search engine on Telefonica’s mobile portals in 15 other countries. But the partnership notably left out two of Telefonica’s largest markets—Germany and Spain.

In November, Yahoo replaced Google as the default search provider for Telefonica subsidiary O2 Germany—and now it’s closed the loop with its deal in Telefonica’s home country.

Still unclear is what will happen to Yahoo’s 80-plus mobile distribution deals once its search partnership with Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) goes into effect. Yahoo will use Bing as its exclusive search platform for PC-based searches. However, the mobile search relationship isn’t exclusive, with Yahoo allowed to choose other partners if it wants to. Discussions are ongoing.

Here’s the announcement.

Related

• O2, Telefonica Add Yahoo's oneSearch To Mobile Portals
• Yahoo Lands Another Mobile Search Distribution Deal—This Time In Germany

Nothing like a good, hard dose of scathing reality to scare the hell out of a media audience. Michael Wolff - the Vanity Fair columnist, Newser operator and Murdoch biographer - happily obliged at MediaGuardian’s Changing Media Summit in London…

That Wolff is both a media realist and an increasing thorn in Murdoch’s reputation is little new. Today, he expanded on his comments last month that Rupert is “off the reservation”...

On News Corp...

“I think that he is only half-way (off the reservation). I think he’s mad as hell.

“Murdoch who has always been the defiler of journalism and newspapers is (now) the last defender.

“This is the business he has grown up in - it’s the only business that he loves and knows - he may own movie studios but, really, he’s never, to my knowledge, sat through a movie besides Crocodile Dundee. He doesn’t watch television although he’s the largest creator of television programmes in the world. All of those businesses exist so that he can be in the newspaper business.

“It’s incredibly painful for him to see that, actually, he might not make it to retirement (with the business in tact).

“He sees himself as the only guy who might save this business. That’s what he wants to be. If he saved a British newspaper business in the late 80s, that’s what he thinks he’s doing now.

“The interesting thing is that no-one else in his company thinks like this. They have to indulge him because he’s Murdoch and that’s the way the company is organised. There’s not a mechanism to really challenge him. It is Rupert alone who is out there waging this battle. The paywall battle - totally Rupert. Up till little more than a year ago, Rupert had never been on the web unaccompanied.

“When he’s talking about the technological future, it’s entirely based on the technological past. He’s not in a position to materially affect this world. Rupert is almost irrelevant to this discussion.”

On why we’re all screwed…

“The chickens are coming home to roost. Most of the people who run traditional media will not be the people to step in to this new world.

“There is a line and people are not going to get over it. It used to be, up until 18 months ago, ‘there is a line but I hope I get to retirement before I cross that line’. This recession has meant people really understand that they won’t.

“Every big-city newspaper in the U.S. is either in bankruptcy or will be in bankruptcy in the foreseeable future - that’s 12 months. The newspaper industry in the U.S. is over.

“It’s been happening since before the internet - it’s not because of it.

“This has happened again and again and again in every industry - new technology has come along, and you just can’t make the change; it almost inevitably never happens. It’s easier to start with people who have no historical bias.

“If you’ve spent your career in one technology, in one business model, it’s just not efficient to have to undo that.

“The primary source of news is not going to be newspapers, is not going to be television, it’s going to be in the digital world.”

But there is track record for business transformation in massively disrupted companies, I said from the audience - IBM became a services company, Kodak got serious about digital. Assuming media have a bright side, Is there an equivalent transformation point for them?, I asked. “IBM is an interesting example - it found another niche off its track - it did not become Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT). Some media companies will move in another direction - different from the one they are going in and from where their competition is after them. Radio should have died” when TV came along - but reinvented itself by getting out of programming and instead running rock ‘n roll and traffic news, Wolff said.

This moving aside is the same thesis forthcoming in Simon Waldman’s book.

By Stephen Brook: The start of the Times Online paywall is imminent, with a special preview about to launch.

News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks told staff today that subscribers to the Times and Sunday Times and those registered with Times Online will be invited to register for an “exclusive preview of the new digital proposition” this week.

This blog has tipped – twice – that the paywall will start in early May, possibly May Day.

Speculation has ranged from NI producing a “velvet rope” giving its print subscribers free online access, or the company including website subscription fees on Sky bills.

Brooks seemed to confirm today that the Times Online website will start charging for content before the Sun and News of the World. The separate Sunday Times website is due to launch at the same time.

Brooks told staff today: “Each of our titles, in its own way, has pioneered quality, professional journalism and we are unashamed to say we believe it has value.

“In contrast, the industry is making the mistake of chasing millions of unique users by giving the audience more and more content for free. An obsession with traffic just doesn’t pay.”

Below is the memo in full:

FAIR PRICING FOR DIGITAL CONTENT
Message from Rebekah Brooks
Those of you that subscribe to The Times and The Sunday Times or have registered on Times Online will receive a communication starting from this week inviting you to register for an exclusive preview of the new digital proposition. This shows that we are getting closer to the launch of the titles’ new digital sites.
I have made no secret of our intention to start charging for quality journalism online.  As you may have seen speculation in the media about our plans, I wanted to take this opportunity to let you know why we believe this is such an important development.
We are committed to producing quality journalism that is written by professionals with a profound understanding of their subject and a commitment to provide well-informed coverage of the issues. Each of our titles, in its own way, has pioneered quality, professional journalism and we are unashamed to say we believe it has value.
In contrast, the industry is making the mistake of chasing millions of unique users by giving the audience more and more content for free. An obsession with traffic just doesn’t pay.

Great journalism needs investment and we are committed to supporting the fantastic work that you are all producing and delivering to our audiences. It is the quality of the journalism that you create, and the ways in which we produce and distribute it, that will continue to set our titles apart from the competition.
And to be clear, when we talk about charging for our content online, we are talking about charging a fair price. Price alone will not be a barrier to take up.  Of course, we expect to see the numbers of unique users of our sites come down dramatically. But the people who register to our new digital products will be customers who have made a positive decision to pay a fair price for journalism that they value, and they will be those who are more committed to and engaged with our titles.
This is an exciting development for our company especially as we will be among the first in the world to take this step. There are many who declare we have set ourselves an impossible task. But our company loves nothing more than challenging the status quo.
Shortly I will update you on our plans in more detail. But, in the meantime, I believe that with the combined force of your talent, commitment and hard work, we will, in the months and years to come, define a new future in the way we create, deliver and profit from our journalism.
Rebekah Brooks
Chief Executive, News International

After its 2007 acquisition, it doesn’t seem like CBS (NYSE: CBS) has been able to get the most from its $280 million Last.fm outlay. There’s been no TV scrobbling, no profit, the site’s key execs have left and fitting the trendy Silicon Roundabout, London, startup in to a U.S. megacorp appears to have been a challenge generally.

But now CBS has reined Last.fm in to its interactive music group, with direct oversight from president David Goodman. Speaking to me after we came off a panel at MediaGuardian’s Changing Media Summit on Thursday, the unit’s product VP Fred McIntyre offered some new insight…

“The subscription business drives about a quarter of Last.fm’s revenue.” It has paying subscribers in the “high tens of thousands”, McIntyre said - that’s way low compared with Spotify’s 320,000, gained after just a year and a bit.

“Our plan is to be profitable with Last.fm in 2010. We’re very bullish on the subscription service. We’ll be rolling out some new features around the subscription service in Q2. The U.S. is now a quarter of Last.fm’s overall audience.”

Expect upcoming announcements about incorporating Last.fm’s scrobbling feature, which notes users every track listen, on other sites. Last.fm has recently done this with Shazam and We7.

Public relations news monitor Meltwater has come out fighting - but not too hard - after as we revealed on Tuesday it had been blocked from indexing News International’s Times Online.

It’s issued a 259-word statement in response that says… well, not much. The essential point: Meltwater is sticking to its guns and waiting for what it hopes will be an industry-standard ruling in its favour from the UK’s Copyright Tribunal, to which it took the Newspaper Licensing Agency’s (NLA) new online use license.

The sticking point: News International’s Times Online, here, is operating a similar principle to the NLA, of which it is a member - but it’s not operating the agency’s new licenses; it’s acting unilaterally…

Here’s the full response… For the back story, read the previous post...

“Earlier this week, Times Online, published by News International, took the step of blocking Meltwater from indexing its website. We find this move both surprising and disappointing as Meltwater has sought a ruling by the UK Copyright Tribunal to provide clarity on current UK copyright law. Yet, despite the fact that the Tribunal is still months away from reaching a decision, News International has chosen not to wait for a judgment, but to pursue its own course of action unilaterally.

“Meltwater acknowledges that there are different interpretations of the current UK copyright law today. However, we firmly believe that our services do not infringe upon anyone’s copyright because our services do not keep nor provide our clients with copyrighted content. To create clarity on this issue, Meltwater has brought the NLA’s (Newspaper Licensing Authority) proposed licensing scheme for online news to the UK copyright tribunal (Meltwater press release). Meltwater believes that the entire industry will benefit from a clear ruling on this complex issue, which is so important for all players in the online media industry. The Copyright Tribunal recently rejected the NLA’s claim that Meltwater was not entitled to have its case heard.

“Times Online’s recent action is just the latest development in the ongoing copyright discussions in the UK market, a discussion that is far from over. Meltwater continues to serve the needs of its customers and we are reviewing all the options available to us – including the relevant technical and legal considerations – to ensure we continue serving our clients long into the future.”

Khris Loux is the founder and CEO of Echo, a commenting platform. He tweets at @Khrisloux.

With leadership from its founders and a significant infusion of cash from investors, Twitter has created an innovative no-charge service for users and industry-standard APIs for developers. But more recently, access to its data through those APIs has been fairly inconsistent, with particularly opaque procedures for getting at its most coveted dataset, its full stream of Tweets.

Twitter has recently begun selling publishers, big and small, access to all its Tweets. Its licensing of the “full firehose,” as it is also known, to Google (NSDQ: GOOG), Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) and Yahoo (NSDQ: YHOO) marks Twitter’s first big move towards monetization. The micro-blogging company has yet to make public the terms of these deals, but according to one report, Twitter is bringing in a combined $25 million from those agreements. Meanwhile, Twitter has granted small startups access to the same data at rates “proportional to the size of the company,” according to Ryan Sarver, Director of Platform at Twitter.

This points to a potential conflict: Quiet deal-making, variable pricing, and uneven access across Twitter’s partner base could create questions about the commercial viability of the entire ecosystem. Twitter has an opportunity to maximize its own value and retain its inter-galactic goodwill with users and partners alike by fostering a new level of transparency around the licensing deals.

How to do that?

Twitter should license the full firehose to publishers, whether directly or indirectly through partners, in a real-time feed that includes all the elements of the Tweets, like geotargeting, time stamp, etc. And the communication between Twitter and those potential partners over pricing, process and terms should be open and transparent.

Similarly, Twitter has an opportunity to create either value or angst for the developer community. The Twitter platform has led to countless third-party innovations, resulting in a rich set of applications that enhances the core platform. And Twitter has publicly encouraged these developers to join in the “gold rush” of opportunity and build businesses on its platform.

Indeed, the staggering growth of the service and a healthy ecosystem of complimentary applications have made Twitter a sort of benevolent king.

Now the hard part: building a business without becoming a tyrant.

Twitter’s recent release of Twitter Lists, for example, undercuts the work of partners like TLists and shows the tightrope that Twitter (indeed all proprietary platforms) must walk to both grow their core platforms while also making sure that developers have an incentive to build on top of those platforms. Twitter’s failure to strike that balance could alienate a prime engine of its long-term value and growth.

These issues are obviously not unique to Twitter; many successful companies (especially on the web) face these same challenges as they mature. But for its part, Twitter has an opportunity to figure out that happy medium in a way that has eluded companies such as Microsoft and Facebook. And if its executes well, Twitter can establish itself as a new kind of technology company.

In short, it’s the ultimate opportunity for Twitter to create a radically open business model, one that mimics the open nature of the Twitter service itself.

Related

• Updated: @ SxSWi: Twitter Tries For Maximum Value With Least Effort
• Yahoo, Twitter Launching Broad Partnership
• Twitter Rolls Out Another Feature For Businesses: Multi-User Account Access
• Google Integrates Twitter With Its Friend Connect

Not sure on what basis the Wikipedia founder pontificates about the future of news media, but every disruptor deserves his say, so Jimmy Wales took the opportunity at MediaGuardian’s Changing Media Summit…

—On Google’s China problem: Wales likened Google’s position up ‘til recently (agreeing to censor results in order to make in-roads) to how businesses regarded “apartheid South Africa” in the 80s - a reluctant embrace, but involvement nonetheless. “I know Larry and Sergei and they’re a little bit naive. They are idealistic and very, very wealthy - and quite young. They don’t need another few billion from China.” So now Wales, whose Wikipedia there was blocked for a time, ‘very strongly supports Google” in what may be a principled retreat from China.

—What’s eating traditional media?: “There are things communities do better than the traditional model ... The best of the political bloggers are easily the equal of the opinion columnists at the New York Times (NYSE: NYT). I don’t see the added value there and question whether a newspaper should be paying large sums of money for that anymore. The traditional newspaper publishing cycle doesn’t really work that well online. In the newspaper business, we’re selling the stale bread, which is the print paper, and giving away the fresh bread for free (online).”

—Wrong kind of cutbacks?: “The basic nuts and bolts of traditional journalism is something we’re not seeing being replaced by communities. Large segments have basically been cut out - that’s a mistake because there is a demand for that information. A lot of the moves that have been made have been cuts in the wrong areas.

Web video ads and analytics provider VideoPlaza of Stockholm is taking a €3.5 million first proper funding round to solidify its European efforts.

The outfit can place ads of various formats in online videos powered by 15 different video platforms, and then offers metrics to help advertisers plan and understand campaigns.

VideoPlaza got nearly €500,000 in seed funding from Creandum and angels back in July 2008 and, CEO Sorosh Tavakoli tells me, broke even in December…

“That proved the business worked in a smaller size - now we’re raising money to do the same on a larger scale,” he says. The new funding from Northzone means VideoPlaza now has both of Spotify’s original institutional investors on board.

So far, VideoPlaza has 25 paying clients in seven European and Scandinavian markets, including broadcasters TV4 and Kanal5 at home in Sweden. Brightcove is a key partner, but there are problems getting to plug in with YouTube. It has staff in Stockholm, London and Paris and recently hired a southern Europe director based in London. Tavakoli says Germany is the next step before he settles to concentrate on existing markets.

So far, it customers are mainly Scandinavian, so it needs to break out, but it does place ads in Incisive Media and Factory Media videos, as well as in some licensed by Myvideorights. But don’t expect American expansion with this funding: “The U.S. is a non-focus area - we turn down business there.”

Online video has reached a point where growing adoption is presenting a fast-moving advertiser opportunity - and an accompanying rush from advertising and metrics vendors. But online video advertising is going large just at the same time content owners in some other media sectors run away from advertising as a sole funding avenue.

Here’s Beet.tv’s Andy Plesser interviewing Tavakoli at a recent roundtable Andy and I co-chaired at The Guardian…

Haven’t they read the mess newspapers are in? More money than sense?

Either way, at this rate, perhaps Russia’s growing oligarch set could be a viable strategic alternative, for hard-pressed European papers, to the reality of industry change and economic malaise.

The latest - after last year buying France-Soir, the country’s smallest daily, for €50 million, shipbuilder’s son Alexander Pugachyov is now spending a further €20 million on a marketing campaign to take it mainstream. He’s upping the print run by 20 times, has halved the cover price and has more than doubled newsroom staff from 40 to 100.

Jealous? There’s no part of this that makes immediate sense. In fact, contrasted with the cutbacks, climbdowns and contraction many parts of the industry are seeing, it looks like madness.

But - aside from increasing France-Soir’s advertising-exposed readership in readiness for the ad upturn - it’s likely that 25-year-old, Monaco-raised Pugachyov is both operating a plaything on his way up the family business ranks and that his proprietorship plays some wider political significance. AP reports the French government may be about to buy four warships from Russia that would be built in Pugachyov Sr’s shipyard.

The Pugachyov scenario in France mirrors that of Alexander Lebedev in the UK, minus the warships. The former KGB agent took the London Evening Standard, whose circulation was falling, off DMGT’s hands for just a nominal fee, forewent cover-price income in favour of free distribution on a higher print run, and pledged a £25 million investment over three years.

“£25 million investment??” That’s unheard of in today’s news publishing economy. Is there some Trans-European pipeline we don’t know about that’s funneling all western newspapers’ lost profits direct to the trendy wine bars favoured by Moscow’s super-rich?

Now Lebedev’s set to repeat the act by buying The Independent. If his previous trick, and Pugachyov’s, are indication, then, far from taking the Indy online-only - as has been a common expectation over the last two years - Ledebev is likely to want to reinvigorate the printed edition and leave the web firmly a second-tier medium for now. This could be great news for an Indy whose circulation is slipping low despite successfully marking out its territory as a liberal viewspaper. A benefactor with pockets deep enough to take it free to a wider audience could be just the ticket, for the paper itself if not quit for Lebedev’s profit margin.

Maybe these guys would take a shine to the Shropshire Star, or the Neath Guardian? They can but hope.

Seen through each of these three lenses, Russia’s wealthiest men are saving journalism - paper by paper. They are the Abu Dhabi to publishing’s Manchester City, the Roman Abramovic to Chelsea. But other troubled publishers are struggling on with merely their Glazers and Gilletts.

So how long until we all start fluttering our eyelashes in Moscow’s direction?

As major newspaper publishers have seen profits return and ad declines slow a bit, Reuters (NYSE: TRI) is hoping that the time is right to sell a new product designed to enhance understaffed business sections. The news wire plans to unveil its Reuters Financial Infographics initiative, which provides automated delivery of customizable, print-ready financial data layouts to U.S. papers.

The RFI product will be available as an addition to Reuters main news offerings for what the company told paidContent is “an attractive price.” Pressed for more details, a Reuters rep declined to say what the rate is. Interested pubs can get a free trial until March 31. Reuters execs will provide more details on the new initiative later today at the Society of American Business Editors and Writers’ annual conference in Phoenix.

Related

• Reuters Partners With Video Aggregator NDN On Ad-Sharing Deal

Welsh Assembly members on Wednesday adopted a motion expressing support for the UK government’s multimedia independently-funded news consortia (IFNC) proposal - in a heated debate that was a microcosm of arguments due to play out in Westminster…

Conservatives sought to hijack the motion, which would welcome the idea of using public funds to finance nations-and-regional news replacements on ITV (LSE: ITV) after 2012, with an amendment that would instead support ITV’s new chairman Archie Norman to continue producing such output.

“A standpoint that ITV had as few as a couple of months ago, up to today, may have changed,” said Tory member Alun Cairns in the Senedd chamber, referring to a report that the new ITV boss, a former Tory MP, may U-turn on ITV’s belief there’s no longer a business model in nations-and-regions news.

“The Conservative approach is to support ITV in meeting their (current) franchise obligations. There is an opportunity to deregulate the market to allow ITV to increase their income ... allowing them to meet their franchise obligations.”

But, with widespread support from other parties, including members of the governing Labour and Plaid Cymru pairing, the assembly passed the Lib Dem motion 40-9. “This is the only game in town,” said culture minister Alun Ffred Jones.

The motion has no teeth since the assembly government has no devolved media powers, but it may send a message of support to the UK Department for Culture, Media & Sport, which was meeting to pick consortia pilots today, and to whichever government sits in Westminster after May’s general election.

Comments from the debate…

—Culture minister Alun Ffred Jones: “It’s ITV themselves who have been saying the cost is too great for them. It’s incredible that the Conservatives are basing their arguments on a single report in The Guardian that says perhaps Archie Norman is changing his mind - that’s one of the weakest arguments I’ve heard in this chamber for some years. This is the only game in town unless ITV make a very public U-turn - we shouldn’t gamble on ITV saving the day at this time.”

Tories are “gambling” news provision on ITV’s uncertainty, the minister said. He criticised Tories’ alternative proposal to instead create metropolitan TV news channels as inadequately serving areas larger than cities, and he said the only working example of such a channel in the UK is Channel M, which was effectively shut down today.

—Lib Dem member Kirsty Williams: “It’s a bit late in the day for that organisation (ITV) - via The Guardian - to say it’s changed its mind. It’s too important a topic to be at the whim of a company that at first said it doesn’t want to do it.” Williams wants the minister to “lobby the DCMS to ensure the contract is signed before the general election”.

—Plaid Cymru member Bethan Jenkins: “The Tory plan would scrap IFNCs and introduce up to 80 local media companies (LMCs). LMCs don’t work.” She presented research that claims city TV channels don’t scale well, would only be available to a minority of viewers and there is insufficient spectrum: “The cost of acquiring the spectrum is as nothing compared with the cost of creating content.” Favouring the IFNCs, she said: “There is an appetite for change.”

—Lib Dem member Peter Black: “The Conservatives are being driven from Westminster on this issue against the interests of Wales. That (Archie Norman) article was put in as a spoiler - he knows there’s a change coming.”

—Labour member Andrew Davies: “It’s a bit rich of the Conservatives to come to this debate today saying they want to do all they can to support ITV.” Davies said the ITV regional model is “unsustainable”. But he conceded: “My own party has made some considerable mistakes over the regulation of broadcasting over the last decade - free-market ideas have led to the position we’re in today.”

—Tories’ Cairns had also said: “We need to recognise the strength and brand that ITV has produced in producing an alternative ... The IFNC is a short-term proposal because it would only take us up to the franchise negotiations in 2012. ITV pay too much for their franchise; their potential income has been restricted because of the Contract Rights Renewal.”

Rather than have Ofcom release ITV from its public service commitment to produce nations-and-regions news, as ITV had suggested, Cairns wants them retained: “They currently have a legal obligation under their franchise agreement to deliver regional and national news in the UK. They’re not going to walk away from it because of their public service commitment. You’re talking about giving them (IFNCs) £7 million to give them something (ITV is) legally obligated to do in the first place.”

After being argued down, Cairns did not hang around in the chamber while the presiding officer, sensing opposition to his amendment, declined to give members the opportunity to vote on it. They instead adopted the original motion only. The winning IFNC bid is expected to be announced next Thursday. There are three Welsh candidates.

—Spotify: It’s not exactly carrier bundling, but 3 UK is pre-loading its Sony (NYSE: SNE) Ericsson (NSDQ: ERIC) Vivaz handsets with the music service’s Symbian app. No bundled service, though - you’ll still need a £10-a-month subscription.

—ABC (NYSE: DIS) on mobile VOD: On-Demand Group is licensing Disney-ABC shows like Lost and Desperate Housewives for 3 UK’s TV On-Demand subscription mobile TV service. The service is low-key on 3’s site but costs £5 a month or £1.49 a day.