|
Thursday, August 1, 2002 |
the party line from the paper of record
A shift registers in willingness to pay for Internet content [New York Times; free registration required]: The usual party line about "we trained consumers that content was free", and the equally usual omission of any discussion of the value of the content being offered.Only producers of content distributed on conventional models are interviewed; no one is interviewed who is a "consumer" (though in the web this is becoming an increasingly artificial distinction). When Slate went briefly to a subscription, I was willing to pay, because they published Michael Lewis, whose book Liar's Poker is one of my favorites. Similarly, I pay for Salon, because I think they provide good news coverage. I don't pay for most content because it's not worth paying for.
Then too, he should have interviewed people who give away their content, and explored why: I would pay for a subscription to Dave Winer's weblog Scripting News, for example, because Dave's a sharp guy who has a reasonably consistent view and who makes me think; but Dave values being read over being paid.
"A professional writer isn't someone who writes for money. A professional writer is someone who writes because they must." -- Elizabeth Vonarburg, Wiscon 25 Guest of Honor Speech, May 2001
