Technology of the week – group 38 – Blendle vs. De Correspondent
This blog will mention two recent Dutch innovations in the world of (digital) journalism, Blendle and De Correspondent. Moreover, it will discuss both companies and compare them. At the end of the blog there will be made a conclusion about these two companies.
Blendle is a Dutch company which created a digital kiosk, where users only pay for what they want to read. This means individual articles as well as complete magazines and newspapers from all the ‘big’ Dutch publishers, completely digital. Moreover, Blendle has created a social network, whereby users are able to share and recommend articles, and where users are able to follow friends, famous Dutch people and so on. In this way, the two-sided market is visible. Because publishers of all the ‘big’ Dutch newspapers and magazines are connected with the readers through Bendle.
De Correspondent is an innovative Dutch journalism platform, which used crowdfunding to start and now uses crowdsourcing to create journalism. They offer readers news about context and background articles. Not looking for sensation, but looking for the deeper meaning. Especially in the digital age where news reaches everyone within seconds, it is important to deliver not only sensation but also context and background. What is very interesting about de Correspondent, is that the members are able to discuss and react on the articles. By doing so de Correspondent has created a social community. The members of this community are displayed with a name tag of their own specialism/job.
Revenue model: Blendle earns 30% of the articles they sell; the other 70% goes to the publishers. The Correspondent earns 60 euro per member for a one-year subscription.
Business model: Blendle acts as an intermediary between publishers and readers, whereas De Correspondent created a ‘new’ digital paper, focusing on quality content and crowdsourcing.
We think both innovations have great potential. Especially now, when journalism is struggling, innovative concepts like Blendle and De Correspondent are needed. Perhaps, in the near future, Blendle could offer an all-you-can-read subscription to involve even more readers. The Correspondent could market their platform better, to involve more readers and journalist to make even more use of crowdsourcing.
When we take a look at the revenue model of both companies, we think that Blendle has a better market position. The low prices in the range of 10 and 89 cents are a much lower threshold compared to the membership fee of €60,- at De Correspondent. Besides, De Correspondent has higher costs than Blendle. Blendle does not have to pay writers, they only operate as a mediator. So we think that Blendle has a higher potential than their opponent De Correspondent.