Will People Pay for Internet Content?

Image by American Physical Society

People are not likely to pay for content online if they know that what they want can be available to them for free. Internauts are just so used to free abundant information online. So if you ask someone to pay to get access to what you have to offer, I don't think they have enough trust in your product to be willing to give their money away. Trust between the user and the source is really important.

It is however understandable that people who make countless efforts to make information available have to get paid for their work. So the best way to go here is to find alternative ways to get rewarded.

A smart alternative that a lot of online businesses use is the donation model. When you give people a preview of what you are offering and they get used to you there is a certain trust that builds up and they will be willing to reward you. If they don't get the feeling that you are after their money, they are more likely to show you appreciation. A good example of the donation model is Wikipedia which started from nothing and got big thanks to the donations of users.

Based on personal experience, I have never paid when I couldn't get access to the source and check it up. Besides, I know that I can certainly find what I am looking for from another source for free. Aside from that, I have a blog myself and I don't think I will ever make people pay to see what I have to offer because when my stuff is out there it could bring me job opportunities I could never have otherwise. So I say it is a win-win situation for everybody. If not I can always find something else to do and earn a living of.

Free is Better Than Not Free

Image inspired by the UNFORGIVABLE series. Warning Not Safe For Work. Also, racist?


OR IS IT?!
As a poor student, it definitely is. If this recession is good for one thing it's the hot hot sales! But employment is suffering apparently. Whatever, I'm only a part-time bus boy for now and my in-province tuition is relatively cheap. I plan on cashing in big on my slow cooks blog anyways! And those who tried my slow cooker peach crumble probably have lots of faith in me.

Seriously though, I am having difficulty keeping track of what is being made free and what we should be paying for. In the peach crumble recipe link I just posted I mention that I got the directions from Beth Hensperger and Julie Kaufmann's Not Your Mother's Slow Cooker Cookbook. I was pissed when I got the link from amazon because it cost me $10 less than at Chapter's (which I bought with the refund I got on a text book I used all semester, ACE SCAM!, but also because I found out that the same book is available FOR FREE on Google Books. WTF?! Can everyone else read that book for free or is it just my Google account for some reason? If people are just going to post this kind of stuff for free, than I am abandoning my crusade of paying for things. Music, TV, newspapers and movies are one thing, but books? I didn't think I would be able to replace a good hard copy of a respectable cook book, but apparently you can.

I felt pretty good after reading Chris Kelly's article earlier in the semester about the uncopyable generatives, and really made me consider that pirating won't destroy our economy. Now I am not so sure. Are these generatives as reliable as he makes them out to be? I mean, immediacy is dealt with pretty well on the web, and the 100 000 people who downloaded Jackman's movie don't care much for authenticity. The online version of the cook book made me realize that maybe embodiment isn't really that important either, and other generatives are just as flexible. One for me that isn't though, is still PATRONAGE. I honestly feel kind of bad to get this stuff for free, but my wallet doesn't.

So what's gonna happen? I'm not sure, but if there's one thing this class has made me realize is that it needs to happen quickly. I am pretty sure the internet IS THE GREATEST INVENTION EVER and people need to harness and organize it more to their advantage. For me that may still include downloading television (c'mon I have no cable, they want me to watch TV), and downloading news, but I am also going to keep pushing this slow cooker blog as hard as I can/want to while it is enjoyable (or until I start making serious bank.)

"Let My Content Go!"

Felicia Day, probably best known for her role in Joss Whedon's Dr. Horrible's Sing-a-long Blog, produced a wonderfully quirky web series about online gamers. This isn't anything new or extremely revolutionary. I mean, who hasn't heard of Lonelygirl15? What's most interesting about Day's project lies in where she obtained her funding, i.e. how the girl got paid!

In her own words:


Oh, yes, it's happening. People are already paying for content. The difference lies in the sole fact that it is their choice. As paradoxical as Barry Schwartz might think it is, we, the people (and consumers), know what we like. Especially when it comes to art, entertainment and information. According to Lanier, designers and software engineers need to reformat the internet, attune the system to reassemble the free content and fair use initiative, possibly to make it kind of free content and maybe-sorta fair use. I fail to see how, once again, forcing people to pay for something uncertain is a move in the right direction. Looking at Felicia Day's project as an example, it seems as though Lanier hasn't really done his research.

As Kevin Kelly explains in Better Than Free:

Fans like to reward artists, musicians, authors and the like with the tokens of their appreciation, because it allows them to connect. But they will only pay if it is very easy to do, a reasonable amount, and they feel certain the money will directly benefit the creators.

True, Felicia Day creates television-style entertainment, and how does that have anything to do with Journalism? Here's the thing: Not all professional journalists are outstanding. Much like web television. Which then begs the question: Why should we have to pay for their content?

Instead, I think Lanier should have asked: Why should we charge? As there is nothing more affordable than free.

Who Says Journalism is Dead?

All this talk about how journalism is dead is because we are approaching a breakthrough in the actual concept of news reporting. No one can back the claim that the way journalism was sufficed?

There are so many problems with the current "dying" system:

• Consolidation of media outlets resulted in an information monopoly of newspapers held by a handful of powerful families.


• The interests of investors who owned shares in these converged companies have influenced what news is reported.


• Advertisers have also gained a bit of leverage in what makes the news.


• The audience has become discouraged with the media and have moved to the web to find more independent news media


• Many journalists who blog for free are part of the angry audience who are passionate about informing the masses.

Moving forward is a risky operation with a chance of great losses and setbacks. Pay Me For My Content is an editorial by Jaron Lanier, that rustled the feathers of the Jouralism community. More people accept the fact that things need improvement and online is the trend. Working with this we need to put forth a feasible plan and the optimistic encouragement to embolden people. Confidence is the only way we will convince investors to support experimental projects in the current recession.

First we have to understand WHY we need a new system. I outlined this earlier, but there have been books like Media, Profits and Politics: Competing priorities in an Open Society (Harper and Yantic 2003) and Journalism: Critical Issues (Allen 2005) written on the topic. One could dapple in it for quite some time; all you really need to know is the North Atlantic Model of news is old news. (See Hallin and Mancini's "Comparing Media Systems"; 2004.)

With this knowledge we can easily recruit the WHO. This step has already been jump started online in the form of blogging. People are taking on journalism as a hobby, but it is time consuming, The affordable and accessible qualities of online journalism enables those anyone with free time to report.

Unfortunately, in the current system good journalists are not adequately recognized for their exceptional abilities except by their audience size. They don't have enough funding to really expand their capabilities and make it worth their time and efforts. Noteworthy successors who have achieved somewhat sustainable systems include The Huffington Post and Montreal City Weblog (by Kate McDonnell). These blogs have built a prestigious name for themselves, but they often only scrape by. Some, like McDonnell, have not monetized their blogs at all in spite of their large audience.

WHAT can be done to change all this? The PEW Research Center's annual State of the News Media 2009 report show the advertising money is going towards online investments and cable companies over newspapers. The final obstacle we have to overcome is discovering how to profit from this audience. This economic step is the final, most difficult in the process of rebuilding journalism.

All in all, this uncertainty and change will be most beneficial to the practice of journalism. It will revive the integrity of journalists. It will allow for more localized community based systems that can to work together with others in a global media web, while allowing for more specific audience targeting. It could become a more equalized system too, where news is reported according to its true worth and the media net is more evenly dispersed. Such a project under experimentation is the sustainable system Patch.

These systems need to be interconnected with national and international partners to complete the sustainable web. The Internet provides the perfect setting for truly democratic news. Ironically, it may be the infinite trait of this form of telecommunications itself that leaves us hesitant. We have to all move forward together or there will be no hope for progress.

WHEN AND WHERE? Well obviously this is all happening here and now. Those of us passionate enough to revive the media need to jump on the wagon. We can't hang ourselves by mocking the present situation and drowning out our importance and credibility. We need to take this step confidently so that the masses will follow suit. Change is scary but it is usually a good thing and most people understand that now. Journalism economists just need to find that price that people will pay that is not too high but still worth our service to them.

This is not even to say newspaper is out. Once online media begin making significant profits, they can produce free print editions or, more modestly, special weekend editions. However, we are not paying for the (wasted) paper; we are paying for the information and the transparency good journalism creates. That demand will never die. Journalism will never die.

Patience is a Virtue: We Will Get Paid, Eventully

Photo courtesy of RoweBrownWedding

"Through patience a ruler can be persuaded,and a gentil tongue can break a bone."
-Proverbs 25:15

We live in an instant everything world. If we don't get what we want immediately we cry, whine and stomp our feet. O.K. maybe I'm exaggerating a little here. Or am I? I believe we have evolved into an immediate gratification society . Or, maybe we always were and now I'm just more aware of it. After all, there is an abundance of free Internet information out there on the subject.

In Jaron Lanier's article, Pay Me for My Content , he states that, "Information is free on the Internet because we created the system to be that way". That may be true, however that doesn't mean I don't ever want to get paid for my work on my Montreal Theatre blog . Although that would be nice, it doesn't have to happen right now in order for me to continue writing about the theatre scene .

In a response to the same article Bryan Milonja points out in, "Blogging for Money: Think it Over" , "It's true that some people do make a ton of money blogging, but the truth of the matter is that most people don't." I certainly agree. I have discovered that blogging is really a fun and creative activity to do. So if I were to ever make money from this awesome adventure, it would be an added bonus.

Although, I will have to wait. Maybe even wait a long time. Eventually, if I stick with it and write about what I am passionate about it will show, and yes, maybe payoff. Consistency in writing, blogging or anything for that matter builds character and confidence in ones self, as well as your audience. It is also about self discipline , focus , passion and a desire to be heard.

Getting Organized

- Have a special, uninterrupted time set aside to write and then go to it.
- Turn off the phone if you are unable to resist answering it.
- Take time each day to prepare and get organized before you begin to write.
- Once prepared just start writing.
- Don't worry to much about spelling right away. Just get those ideas flowing.
- Stick with it and always save your work.

In our Concordia citizen journalism course this past winter, teacher and Illustrator Matthew Forsythe had mentioned that, he can tell who's passionate about what they are writing about on their niche blogs . I think we all feel it on some level when an article or other written piece lacks energy and zing.

I can also tell for myself when I am writing something that is free flowing, exciting, and driving me to succeed. I am happy, willing and want to work at expressing some point better or stronger . Not settling until it is expressed perfectly. I find it really gratifying to explore our language and find the ideal word or words to express what it is I want to say. So, blogging is right for me.

The fabulous guest lectures Matt brought in, Kate McDonnell of Montreal City Weblog , Journalist Craig Silverman, of Regret the Error , and Sean Michaels, of Said the Gramophone , all share success that comes from hard work and dedication. Work that is sometimes rewarded financially and sometimes not. Yet always rewarding.

Blogging for Money: Think it Over

I've decided that I won't be blogging for money any time soon.

After countless hours of conducting research on how to make blogging profitable (ex: see video above), it's people like Sean Michaels who have convinced me that not blogging for money might just be wiser.

A while back, Michaels ultimately took the decision not to create a business model for his successful Said the Gramophone blog.

By focusing on producing well-written posts and having fun with his blog, he was able to gain quite an audience. The result? Lots and lots of freelancing opportunities.

By being passionate, persistent and consistent about his blogging, Michaels now finds himself writing for a living and loving it. Kind of sounds like what I want to do....

The Realities of Blogging for Money

As I was conducting my research, I stumbled upon Darren Rowse's article on the realities of blogging for money.

Rowse, a pro at blogging for money, provides a great list of things people should consider before trying to make money blogging. Here are a couple of his key points:

• Building a successful blog takes a long time.


• Blogging for money takes a ton of work and knowledge.


• Keeping a blog going on a consistent basis is extremely difficult and takes a lot of dedication.


• Most people don't make much money blogging.

It's true that some people do make a ton of money blogging, but the the truth of the matter is that most people don't.

Clearly, there is an opportunity for me to create a decent business model for my Trampoline Canada blog. However, for now I'm going to be blogging for fun, not money.

I think blogging for fun is the best business strategy for me. If I'm able to make a really good impression on people through the content of my blog, I might just convince a person or two to offer me interesting career opportunities in the future.

Will people pay for Internet content: Yes and no!

In the short history of the Internet we have been used to that almost everything is free of charge, and as long as it is floating around with free alternatives I don´t see that changing. Still, I think that there is a future for some specific content that users will be willing to pay for. 

Computer scientist Jaron Lanier writes in the article Pay me for my content published in New York Times, that software engineers and Internet evangelists should design information systems where people have to pay for the content and refers to "delightful ecosystems" as Second Life or the ecosystem of the Ipod. 
I just have a hard time picturing that software engineers for ideological reasons suddenly will shift into making information systems where one has to pay for the content. Information as news will never be paid for even how delightful the ecosystem is, when you can get the same news for free somewhere else. 

In my opinion there is mainly three different niches on the Internet where there is a good chance that people gladly will pay and already are:

1. Movies or games in high quality
2. Exclusive articles or rapports from respected authors or medias who can give insight in a specific subject which can´t be found anywhere else. 
3. Online communities as in games or dating or more exclusive ones where you can feel part of a group that reflects your personality or that allows you to get in contact with certain people. 

What the three niches offer is either quality that cannot be found anywhere else and/or the opportunity to get in contact with people through a certain interest. I sincerely hope that Jaron Lanier and his colleagues find a way to get writers and artists paid for their content besides from adds but they have to come up with something quite unique when it´s competing against alternatives that are completely free.