The internet should be free (which is different than saying the internet is for porn). And the entire country believes this, well at least my generation. We grew up with the internet; IMing each other in class, downloading music and movies for free, having a seemingly endless supply of information literally at our fingertips. We've been spoiled perhaps. But we've also been cultured. While our parents were raised by their television, we have been raised by Google, Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, and Napster. It took humans thousands of years to enter the industrial revolution, and from there it took another century and a half to build the first car. And then things began to speed up. The radio came about, along with the telephone, then airplanes, television soon followed, and now I can learn about every one of these events in half a day by searching the web. I can learn how to build my own television, or even a bomb from household products. I can read news across the world and even listen to editorials from Iran about America's War on Terrorism. And it's all free to obtain.
In a recent NY Times article (online mind you), many media outlets and publishers are debating whether news should still be free online. With recent economic hardships devastating many industries, advertising sales are not as high as previously predicted when newspapers believed they could give away content for free and charge for advertising. Nowadays, however, the idea has shifted away from "free-to-all," and moved towards "pay-to-read."
The problem resides in the cultural and generational gap that exists between the CEOs and other decision-makers that remember a time when nothing was free. And when a person more insightful and eloquent than myself stated, "the best things in life are free," I'm not sure he/she had considered the internet (but if they had that would be even more impressive). Maybe my generation is greedy, or needs instant gratification, or refuses to admit that the world doesn't owe them something, but it's all a product of our times. We had MTV showing us who to listen to and dress like, cell phones giving us instant access to everyone, AIM keeping us connected to people without ever opening our mouths, televisions offering us thousands of options, and the internet giving us everything we couldn't find, get or learn at home.
If the newspapers believe charging for their content will work beyond the short-term, than newspapers are doomed to fail. No one will agree to pay to obtain information we can watch on CNN, or read on a blog, or even listen to on the radio. The old business model is dead, and those in charge need to begin to think of new ways to make money. The internet is going anywhere, and the more the media tries to fight it, the quicker they will cease to exist. How many people in the world get their news from a professional blogger not associated with a newspaper? Does the AP have a monopoly on current events?
Overlooking the fact that most media outlets have become biased, on one side of the spectrum or the other, and most news programs have adopted a "Top 40," mentality to the news (they find a handful of interesting, scary or popular stories, and replay them all day long), if newspapers try to charge for their content, it will just be pirated anyhow. I can't tell you how many times a "friend" of mine illegally downloaded DVD-quality movies before they were released in theaters. Or how many complete albums leak online before hitting the shelves. What will happen is one person in the world will pay for the content and then just distribute throughout the internet.
The beauty of hackers is that they can't be stopped. Once a wall or security measure has been taken to prevent them from doing one thing, they find a way to break through and do it anyhow. Then they get stopped again and go back to the drawing board. The battle never stops. Anytime people have tried to sell the viewing rights to their site to people online, hackers come up with a way to give it away anyhow. A simple Google search will give me hundreds of promotional codes for all sorts of free and discounted things. There is even a website (no longer running - sad face ) that used to scour the internet for websites that made mistakes on coupons and sales (if a company prints something, even if it's a mistake - like 100% off instead of 10% - it is legally bound to honor the coupon). I'm sure more sites like this exist. The point is no one wants to pay for content online, and no one will.
The internet is the greatest example of "freedom of the press," and "the freedom of information act," put together. Computer programs in general are flimsy and can easily be rewritten, broken into and altered. No matter what sort of security a company puts on a website, someone, or a group of someones, can break into it. And in the long run, the company may pay more in preventing the hackers and for security than they will make in selling their content. The issue is thinking outside-the-box, not using the old school business model in the new school and losing your audience, or readers, in the process.
What I find amusing is that you want to be a writer but you also want online content to be free. How will you be paid as a writer if your work no longer has value?
ReplyDeletemy main point is that there needs to be a new business model and way of making money. either it can come from advertising, product placement, or some other method people haven't thought of yet. But the old idea of selling ad space or commercial time is dying, and any company that wishes to think inside the box, will die as well
ReplyDelete