As managing director Mark Scott has stated, the ABC has the personnel and the resources to make it happen without incurring extra costs.

What he didn’t say, but I imagine will happen, is integration with the proposed “virtual town square” concept that’s now being developed.

The ABC is investing in multimedia capability across the country. Online content is easily transferable to radio and television.

An army of ABC-handled citizen journalists will be in the frontline to break local news such as significant weather events, fires and car accidents.

The ABC, through its shrewd strategic investments and national network, is well placed to benefit.

It also poses a dilemma for Murdoch and Fairfax when it comes to charging for online content. Who will pay if they can see and hear quality news on ABC websites?

As for 24-hour TV news, an hour of watching SKY is enough for me. It becomes repetitive.

However, it’s great to be able to watch a news bulletin at any time of the day and see detailed coverage of major breaking events.

I’ve always been web savvy and knew 12 years ago there would be a drift from newsprint to the web.

I established a rudimentary HTML website for the Myrtleford Times in 1997.

What always troubled me and every other newspaper executive was how to make money from the internet. Nobody is much wiser about that today.

I was pretty much an exception in the late 90s though when it came to recognising the power of digital media.

There’s no doubt newspaper managers sat on their hands, underestimated the threat and failed to react.

Basically the whole business model has to change.

In the transition it’s important to protect what Crikey publisher Eric Beecher has describes as “public trust journalism” — coverage of courts, police, parliament, etc.

Even the ABC doesn’t cover courts, except for high-profile cases.

Scrutiny of government and the judiciary will be severely diminished if the fourth estate collapses.

As for charging viewers for online content … I believe it can work.

There should be at least two tiers of access. The main site should remain free and give unhindered access to readily available information such as sporting results, stories sourced from media releases and AAP.

The second tier should be a paid subscription costing maybe $2 a week. It should give access to breaking news and original content.

The third level, maybe costing $5 a week, should give access to archives and exclusive content, with other valued-added features.

The online “edition” of a newspaper should give MORE content than a print edition.

I imagine there are hundreds of stories written every week by metropolitan journalists that are never published. They should be published online.

As an online reader of The Age, I will pay for access if I feel that I’m getting more than just a rehash of wire stories and some of that day’s articles.

In particular, I will expect quality coverage of breaking news.

The convergence of television and the internet leaves newspapers well placed to become multimedia content providers.

For this to be commercially viable, users will have to pay for the content.

• Discuss this article in the forum.

News Ltd papers in Australia have a diversified revenue base that isn’t dependent on classifieds.

While online subscription news has merit in theory, it’s harder to envisage it working in practice.

People may pay for specialised services, but they expect general news to be freely available on the web.

Trying to change that culture is like trying to stop a runaway train with a piece of string.

Perhaps Murdoch is talking up the digital option to subtly pressure Fairfax into heading that way? Fairfax has a greater need to generate online revenue at this stage.

Online subscriptions may work for archives, but it’s hard to see the idea succeeding for current general news.

After 10 years, newspapers are no closer to finding a sustainable business model on the web.

Competition is usually is a good thing, but is it in this case.

Most country towns are well served by commercial content providers, bloggers and niche community sites covering sport, music, etc.

Not to mention Facebook, Twitter and other social media that are built on communities, often geographical.

No doubt the cost of developing ABC websites is much higher than what a smart community-minded individual would pay to start up a portal.

The ABC should focus on its core business, continue doing a good job with regional radio, and forget about soaking up public funds to compete online with commercial services and community activists.

It’s unheard of that such an important inquiry will hear submissions behind closed doors.

That’s the decision of Justice Bernard Teague, who says the community consultation sessions beginning on Wednesday in Myrtleford are not formal.

“The purpose of the community consultation sessions is to gather information and identify key issues for further research and investigation by the royal commission,” Justice Teague said in a statement.

“This is potentially very sensitive information which may be difficult for individuals to share. On that basis, the royal commission is working to provide a safe environment in which people can express their views.”

Justice Teague said all submissions and formal hearings would be public, except under special circumstances.

Nobody asked for the community sessions to be conducted in private. It seems to be the judge’s unilateral decision and he ought to reconsider.

As a former media lawyer he should be a champion of the public’s right to know.

Members of various football clubs are being offered a year’s home delivery of Monday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday issues for just $25, of which $15 will be donated to the club.

That’s $10 a year for papers with a cover price value of $384.80!

This is clearly a corruption of audit circulation rules, which require sales to be “paid” in some form.

Thursday’s edition of The Age, with its popular Green Guide lift-out, is not included in the deal.

Some analysts believe the relatively low take-up rate is behind a marketing campaign to promote “Freeview” digital television.

A commercial certainly caught my eye last night during the cricket.

A Sydney Morning Herald report yesterday took a cynical view, quoting one commentator describing it as “lipstick on a TV pig”.

The Federal Government will cut off the signal for analogue television in 2013, requiring all Australian viewers to have a digital tuner or set-top box to receive a signal.

The current campaign seems designed to retain viewers and prevent the drift to pay television.

There is a risk for the broadcasters that people simply won’t bother to make the switch to digital; that they will watch pay TV only or abandon television altogether.

It’s only a matter of time before there is complete integration between the PC and television as we currently know it.

Free television faces a bleak future.

The author is referring to a new habit among publishers to place advertising stickers on their front pages.

Numerous examples are given, many from Fairfax broadsheets the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

It’s particularly galling to have the ads stuck over the newspaper’s name.

Questions have been asked about the integrity of the Sydney Morning Herald before, in relation to selling its front page, and the “desecration” of its historic masthead is further evidence that nothing is sacrosanct.

Look at the WA news section and it’s mostly stuff that’s commonly known, lifted from AAP or available from media releases.

WA Newspapers have been criticised for their web site, but the revamp looks pretty good albeit still lacking some features like commenting directly on stories.

I doubt WAN’s online revenue has taken a hit from the Fairfax challenge.

“Gay marriage win in California” the bugle trumpets.

The triumphal introduction: “America’s gay lobby has won a historic victory with the California Supreme Court ruling that the state’s ban on same sex marriages was unconstitutional.”

A biased headline reflecting the opposite view might say: “Court trashes sacred vow”. Of course the appropriate headline is “Gay marriage ban overturned”.