The boobs are back - but for how much longer?

THE DEMISE of the Page 3 model in the Sun newspaper last week was greatly exaggerated with the tabloid defiantly printing the photo of a topless young lady in its Thursday edition.

Campaigners in the No More Page 3 pressure group had tentatively celebrated victory last Tuesday after even the Sun's sister paper the Times suggested the 44-year Page 3 era was finally over.

However, it now appears to be the case that the whole thing was a bit of a publicity stunt, something which the Sun itself was not too sheepish in pointing out.

"Further to recent reports in all other media outlets, we would like to clarify that this is Page 3 and this is a [topless] picture of Nicole, 22, from Bournemouth," it said.

"We would like to apologise on behalf of the print and broadcast journalists who have spent the last two days talking and writing about us."

But it would be a surprise if this was the final chapter in this particular story.

Rumours that Page 3 was on its last legs began circulating as early as February 2013 when the newspaper's proprietor Rupert Murdoch dropped hints of a different direction on Twitter.

Later that year, in August, The Sun’s Irish edition dropped topless Page 3 pictures, with Dublin-based editor Paul Clarkson citing “cultural differences”.

Then, last September, the surest signs yet of a change of mindset came when Mr Murdoch pondered: "Aren't beautiful young women more attractive in at least some fashionable clothes?"

By the middle of this month, the Sun seemed to be following their owner's lead - or, more likely, his direct orders - with the topless model missing from three consecutive editions.

And indeed, the feeling remains that, despite the triumphant return of the feature last Thursday, this may well yet be a short-lived stay of execution.

Not that any final decision will be the result of pressure from the No More Page 3 campaigners.

Rather, octogenarian Mr Murdoch will decide the fate of Page 3 on the basis of a hardened commercial calculation with the increasingly raunchy celebrity world seemingly helping him make his mind up.

His latest tweet said yesterday: "Worry not, The Sun will always have great looking women - and men!"

Noticeably, though, this again does not stipulate that they will necessarily be topless.

Time has, indeed, moved on. Back in the 1980s and 1990s, some of the Sun's Page 3 girls ended up being bona fide celebrities in their own right.

Nowadays, that does not really happen anymore - and it is fair to say, at best, the feature seems dated.

To its worst critics of course, Page 3 has always been totally incongruous with the Sun's self-proclamation of being a "family" newspaper.

But it would potentially be the start of a very dangerous game if any government were ever to legislate control over what any newspaper printed simply on grounds of taste and decency.

And so, for now, boosted by a big wave of somewhat self-made publicity, it is no surprise to see the boobs are back.

And that, while you can't see tits on the radio, you can still see them on page three of the country's best-selling daily newspaper.

The Sun takes the paywall plunge

THE SUN newspaper took a momentous step yesterday by joining its Murdoch stablemates, the Times and the Sunday Times, and putting its online content behind a paywall.

Subscribers will have to pay £2 per week for access to Sun+, the website version of Britain's biggest selling paper.

But, while the stats have shown for years that the Sun has been a success off the news stands, it has begun its online revolution from a rather low base.

Recent figures put the pre-paywall Sun website readers on 1.8million unique browsers per day. This compares poorly to the market leader, the still-free Mail Online of the Daily Mail, which attracts an average of 8.1million visitors.

Meanwhile, the Guardian - with 4.8millions daily users - comes next, ahead of the Daily Telegraph, with 2.7million.

As direct tabloid rivals, though, it will be the increase in the Daily Mirror's online traffic which would have been of most concern to the Sun.

Even before the paywall was erected, the Mirror had made a march on the Sun - and, yesterday, it cleverly used the front page of its website to declare "the best things in life are free".

So what does the Sun have to offer to tempt subscribers?

Easily the biggest booty which has been publicised is the newspaper's £30m+ investment in Premier League highlights.

It is an apparently a good enough move that media commentator Steve Hewlett "can see [it] working" - but I remain a lot more sceptical.

For a start, the BBC's Match of the Day will show exactly the same goals a little later but on a free-to-air basis.

And, for anyone out on the town on a Saturday night or too hungover to watch the Sunday morning repeat, MotD will even be on iPlayer for the first time in this coming season.

As for the Sun's other potential unique selling points... Want breaking news? Then, look no further than the BBC or Sky websites.

Desiring a right-wing rant against immigrants or welfare 'scroungers'? Try the Mail Online, if you must. There, you will also find enough vacuous celeb gossip to preclude the need for the Sun.

Finally, charging for Page 3 tits - on the internet of all places - just sounds totally ludicrous.

Of course, the Sun - and its new editor David Dinsmore - could prove me wrong - and, indeed, the whole journalism industry remains optimistic that some sort of paywall scheme could work.

Already, though, some of the Sun's biggest-name retail advertisers, such as Tesco, Currys and Marks & Spencers, are holding fire on running activity on the Sun+ - at least until it can prove that it has sustained evidence that it is reaching its ambitious subscriber targets.

The Sun has responded by launching an ad campaign of its own, but the £10m spent there just adds to the spiralling costs which will need to be recouped by getting readers on board.

Estimates suggest the Sun will need to attract more than 250,000 subscribers to cover the loss of online advertising and make back its outlay on the digital Premier League football.

It will do well to get anywhere near that. The website of Rupert Murdoch's other daily News UK title, the Times, went behind a paywall in July 2010 and is ailing badly, reaching fewer readers now than the Independent and the London Evening Standard.

The crux of the matter seems to be that, unlike those of other major newspapers, the News UK websites do not give away any content for free.

By contrast, in March, the Telegraph began employing a metered paywall which allows a limit of 20 free articles before those wanting more are invited to take out a free trial subscription, and then a paid one, from a cost of £2 a week.

This allows casual consumers of the Telegraph, like myself, to pass by the website every now and then, with more ardent readers having to subscribe.

So far, the tactic has been pretty successful with no discernible downturn in traffic, and perhaps a metered paywall is the way forward for newspapers looking to make money from its online content.

All the while, the Sun - and the Times - are having to rely entirely on the loyalty and goodwill of their readers. Good luck to them with that.