The CRTC Needs to Go

Video courtesy of Jesse Hirsh

After years of taking a more hands-off approach to new media on the Internet, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has unfortunately recently decided to re-open the file.

Currently, a public hearing is being held in Ottawa investigating the issue of Canadian broadcasting in the new media environment.

New Media Regulation: ISP Levy

Due in part to the CRTC's undying obsession with protecting Canadian content within the Canadian broadcasting system, the organization is ultimately "looking at setting up a $100-million fund to support homegrown programming on the Internet," reports the Globe and Mail.

The CRTC would do so by introducing an Internet service provider (ISP) levy, a tax Canadians would be forced to pay to support Canadian artists and to ensure that there is an adequate amount of Canadian content available to them online.

The Public Hearing is a Waste of Time

Instead of wasting their time with useless hearings, I think the CRTC should have listened to the two leading broadcast lawyers they once hired. Laurence Dunbar and Christian Leblanc wrote a lenghty report for the CRTC, cautioning them that regulating Canadians while the rest of the world is competing in an open market would in fact be counterproductive.

The CRTC is Out of Touch with Reality

It's clear to me that the CRTC mistakenly believes that Canadian programs are "a public service essential to the maintenance and enhancement of [Canada's] national identity and cultural sovereignty."

Quite frankly, I can't say that I associate my sense of being Canadian with any Canadian program currently being played on television or online. In fact, I don't even watch Canadian content because it's so incredibly boring!

Let's face it, most Canadian artists have consistently proven that they are not inventive enough to compete in the marketplace in terms of producing interesting films and television shows. Seriously, Corner Gas? To know that this is the sort of Canadian content the CRTC is protecting is truly sad and frustrating.

The CRTC Should be Abolished

In a perfect world, in my opinion the CRTC would be shut down. The organization is becoming increasingly irrelevant. Today, Canadians can pick and choose what they want to watch or listen to at their own convenience for free, online.

Deregulating Canadian broadcasting systems would mostly likely force Canadian artists to start doing a better job. In the end, they would have to create interesting material people actually want to spend time watching or listening to.

If Canadian artists are able to creatively figure out ways for their content to appeal to much broader audiences, Canadian broadcasting, either in the conventional or new media forms, can succeed without any assistance or protection from the CRTC.

Homeless Nation is New Media at Its Best

"Compassion suffers together not in isolation," is the belief and heart behind Homeless Nation. This is a website where the voiceless are heard and a place to call home for those who have no other.

Brett Gaylor, board-member and producer of this innovative website, and his fellow architects of Homeless Nation are on the verge of a breakthrough. They epitomize my very own vision of the future of media. They have opened the world of journalism and information production/distribution to people who would never have had the opportunity through traditional outlets. They provide women like first nations activist, Rose, with the knowledge and means to tell their stories.

In taking away the label of 'hobo' or 'pan-handler' and giving each person a name and face, the website forces us to see the individual stories behind homelessness. I am constantly getting in arguments with people who stereotype homeless people as lazy or who claim that they choose to live the life they lead. This may be the case for some, but each person has his or her own story. Homeless Nation allows them to share their stories and fight against those generalizations.

This is citizen journalism and new media at its best. In this very same way Africans may overcome the Western media's painted image of them. They will no longer be seen as helpless objects of our pity. They can portray themselves in a dignified light. They can represent their own issues so we may see behind the label of 'ethnic' or 'tribal' warfare to the politically, socially and economically distinct characteristics of each one. New media will enable them and the rest of the drowned out voices to speak out so that we may come together as a globe. It will grant us all the ability to share our opinions and stories and see perspectives we never considered before. It can bring us together and help us better understand each other, allowing us to improve our society as a whole.

Canadian Broadcasters Should Adapt with The Times

Michael Geist's viewpoint shared in Canadian Broadcasting Policy For a World of Abundance is right on: Canadian broadcasters should

Picture by Peanuts

suck it up and realize that traditional media, as we once knew it, is on life support.

Having the government step in to impose regulations will not solve anything.

Instead of being Charlie Brown trying to kick a football that will never stay put, they now have the opportunity to hold the football in their hands and be in control of their fate.

Canadian broadcasters have to catch up with those already ahead of them. In doing so they could potentially BE one step ahead. Nobody would then complain if that were to be.

The current structure under which CRTC regulations are set isn't any more beneficial to Canadian content, hence broadcasters too. Placing content on the Internet where it could find an audience as opposed to pitting it against, say, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation through traditional media where it will be completely overlooked and eventually cancelled is simply destructive. Why fight to keep a system that isn't working?

Adapting with the times, in this case, would mean taking a second look at these regulations. As long as Internet media is still out there, we are competing against world media. This also means largers groups of people can be reached as well. These rules should reflect this new reality in order to evolve into the 21st century.

Perhaps it's time for Canadian broadcasters to take initiatives and stop relying on government to solve their issues.

The sky is falling the sky is falling

art and photo bryan james

yeah! yeah! get on the train before it leaves the station. In this age of Abundance the worse thing one can do is block the road to excess. Stop, take a deep breath. Lets look at this thing closely. sure the whole idea of abundance is, we can have as much as we want, when we want it and for a relatively low price, good But how do we eliminate the bad choices? Remember Bruce Sprinsteens song "57 channels and nothing on?"Drive through anytown North America,You will find the same crappy fast food outlets,fast clothing outlets and fast lifestyles oulets, from A&W to Walmarts. If you travel to Jamaica or Nicaragua, fly To japan and low and behold, the same abundance of poo! Is this what we are racing towards, sameness.? A deliberate method to create easy markets.for easy consumers. sure, on one end we can have discriminating users of media, on the otherend? is having access to "the NHL fight of the week" necessary? is having access to Gossip girl really that important? i think not.

This isn't what technology is made for

.
when we overload the system with stuff i feel it crushes other voices. okay, thats a bit strong,but It takes longer to find stuff! Technology eats smaller cultures, everyday languages die because they do not fit in the digital paradigm

As technologies take hold some cultures die and as cultures die so goes precious information. as an example, before the technology of the written word many tradtitions were passed from one generation to the next, orally, each group had specific codes of reference. with the written word many oral cultures died out, the transmission of information and the keeper of this information was held by those with the right technology. These cultures expanded with the technology they wrote their histories and "omitted" the oral histories. As we move from written to analogy tape a lot of the written work gets discarded, think of the parts of spiritual text left out of the bible etc. think of the tapes of music you have that will never make it to digital format,and be lost.my point is eventually those that own the technology dictates the content. so the major languages will occupy large amounts of room on the internet. languages, like some inuit dialects will disappear,along with how each culture referrs to themselves.

THERE IS HOPE!
One ray of hope in this digital doom, when we think of film we think of America. but the largest producer is
INDIA. Africa, or Nigeria Nollywood, is making inroads producing cheap digital videos that are sold on the home view market. Rarely will we see these films loaded on the internet or on the cable t.v. but they do make the access equal. When africans have as many computers as north americans...WATCH OUT

Canada should join the race

Michael Geist's article ‹a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2252/159/"›Canadian Broadcasting Policy For a World of Abundance‹/a› decidedly denounces the ridiculous Canadian attempt to continue acting on scarcity when the issue is now abundance. It sounds like denial, overall, especially since the idea of dealing with abundance is not particular to Canada. Canada hasn't been assuming the role of a leader in the fields of the environment, media or entertainment recently, but in Michael Geist's article, you really get a feeling Canada is a stubborn mule, digging its heels in rather than taking the lead. I suggest Canada be a racehorse; a leader, a record-breaker and a source of aspiration. Instead of desperately clinging to our neighbours to the South for economic comfort, let's take risks and detach from our pseudo-American tendencies. Geist's article deals with the attempt to restructure Canadian broadcasting policies. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission new chair hired two broadcasting lawyers to analyze the regulations and policies. They suggested, broadly, to start claiming internet space rather than tightening (already somewhat vice-like) regulations and restrictions. If Canada fails to follow this advice, it would be the equivalent of denying the current economic crisis. The economy of abundance is here, the population is mainly already aware, and not claiming internet space at this point is a tantrum-like refusal to keep up with modern times. Canada's entertainment industry is not comparable to our neighbours' and the development in availability of the long tail would serve the Canadian product well in this case. It would also help it survive. Canada may see the role of the metaphorical racehorse as risky (riskier than the mule), but that being said, Canada should not abstain from the races.

CRTC needs to self reflect or else

(photo credit plutor/flickr)


The CRTC will embrace new media when:

a) traditional Canadian broadcasters have lost millions of dollars in ad revenues
b) Canadian audiences abandon traditional broadcast in favor of alternate media and classic literary works
C) they're sipping frozen drinks in hell

I'm thinking a. I have a special place in my heart for Canadian broadcast, therefore I'd like to believe the CRTC will avoid a chilly afterlife, but their mad quest to control isn't going to earn them any fans.

On one hand, some get it, but then you have other [powers that be] that still don't understand old rules don't apply anymore. New media is less about the wealthy elite controlling the masses' access to information than it is about information being freely available to anyone who wants it.

The consumer now has power and choice - whether it's in what they want to watch, when and how they want to watch it, or even if they would like to generate their own content for broadcast. Many moons ago, in 2007, Michael Geist warned that the outdated protectionist stance CRTC regulators imposed on broadcasters was not suited to the changing broadcast technology. Fast forward to 2009 and what has the RCRTC learned? Yeah, good luck with that, ya hardheads.

I understand old habits die hard; I suffered through years of regular programming (and one English station with lousy reception) before I discovered the joys of watching Heroes and Gossip Girl online. I admit I recently broke down and subscribed to digital cable, but it's always liberating to know that if I'm out and forget to program the pvr, I can still catch my favorite show online at my convenience and not on someone else's schedule.

Chris Anderson's article on the economics of abundance reinforces the idea that stuff is cheap, plentiful and ours for the taking. Of course it isn't, but sometimes it's hard to reconcile the endless potential of the internet with the limits of your immediate surroundings (especially when you've gone from store to store looking for a #$%*@*! robe when you could've just clicked here and saved a lot of time, money and aggravation). The availability of information is a great thing for the masses, but it also represents a lo$$ of control for those who were in charge.

So what does a displaced gatekeeper do to regain a semblance of control? Adapt or become irrelevant. Depending on where you sit on the food chain, the concept of free can be seen as either a benevolent act or trickery. Kevin Kelly's article identified eight generatives to create profit in a free economy. It requires tapping into certain traits that can be cultivated and become valuable commodities, but never copied.

Better Than New: Curbside Trinkets & Treasures

As Kevin Kelly shares with us in his article, Better than Owning, we could be heading into the future without having to buy all that much.We can rent what we want, then give it back when we grow tired of it or don't want it anymore.Photo by Melissa

The good news is we can do this again and again with all sorts of goodies, knick-knacks, and dust collectors. We never have to worry about owning anything anymore and why should we, when we can rent all our stuff with the same benefits.

The problem with that logic is:

- We are a people never satisfied so this trend will cost us big time cash in the long run.

- We live in a society that judges, values and reinforces the narrow minded ways of thinking, "the person with the most toys wins."

- The environment, already suffering from our previously owned trash, will become a wasteland when trendy rented articles are added to the heap.

As Kelly points out, "Women's handbags are a $9 billion retail industry in the US." That's outrageous. My stylish second hand bag cost just $4.
Land of Plenty
It's absolutely ridiculous to believe we as a society won't ever need to worry about not having what we want, when we want it and how we want it. Instant gratification at our fingertips.

Sounds simple, easy, and convenient. A little too convenient and not the ideal, green route to take. This certainly encourages an already thriving throw away society.

Home Sweet Second Stuff Home

Eric and Shannon got it right when they took stock of their priorities and decided to furnish their new home with second hand treasures, curbside freebies and garage sale finds.With a combined income of over $100,00 their decision to decorate creatively was by personal choice rather than necessity. As Shannon says, "Other people's junk is our treasure."


Want vs Need

We are a spoiled rotten bunch with our, "I deserve it" mentality, "must have now" attitudes, and our "got to get" the newest, brightest, biggest, (or smallest) up- to- the-minute latest gadgets and gizmo's.

After all, our possessions define who we are. And who we are, after we have put on our public masks of course, is a society that loves stuff.

Stuff that is better and shiner than what the neighbor has down the street. That is unless we hunted it out from his trash to begin with.

How To Get Paid By Eating-up Crap

Photo credit: Trevor Pitt

The biggest problem with online "abundance" right now is the amount of crap there is to clean up! Yes, computers are copying machines, but that does not mean that creativity and originality can't flow anymore.

"Abundance IS worthless!" as Kevin Kelly's article Better Than Free puts it. It's created by people dumping things online (videos, news, photos, etc.) and seeing if its going to stick or not. What doesn't stick gets filtered out and takes the back seat at Google. The problem with dumping so many things online is that the abundance spawns even more abundance when it's regurgitated by bloggers and other news sites who basically summarize the source material and call it their own. So, now not only do you have a big pile of crappy content, but you have an even bigger heap leaching out from under it. This poorly managed pile of crap is worthless! But, one mans poop can be another mans pyramid, and if he knows how to market it right he can make a wicked profit.

Kelly's article states that things that can't be copied, cloned and replicated are valuable. So that means there are ways you can make money online. You just have to make sure that you are coming to the table with something creative and new. If you have a niche and a desired personality you start the extraction process. 

Photo credit: MTV

A great example of a person doing this is celebrity gossip blogger, Perez Hilton. This guy has made a living by reading the vast amounds of celebrity news out there and pooping out little golden articles. So, how does he do it?! Kevin Kelly's article mentions that there eight generative qualities that add value to free material. Let's dissect Perez Hilton's blog and find out how he fulfills Kelly's list of eight generative qualities...

1. Immediacy - When a rumor is out Perez blogs about asap.
   
2. Personalization - Perez knows his audience. He knows that they want "celeb-bratty" gossip laced with crude humour.
   
3. Interpretation - Instead of a using a formal writing style, Perez uses a more raw approach. Instead of using "mad" he uses "pissed off", instead of writing father, he writes "baby's daddy".
   
4. Authenticity - Perez uses his own edited photos to accompany his articles.
   
5. Accessibility - PerezHilton.com is availible on any device that can get internet. Theres also a Facebook page and Twitter.
   
6. Embodiment - His blog is online, but you can also subscribe to Perez Mobile and receive shortened content on your phone.
   
7. Patronage - Fans don't pay for the content, but they just might pay for the Perez Hilton T-shirts and other merch he sells on his site...or buy his new book about being a fat, obnoxious gossip blogger.
8.  Findability - If you search celebrity gossip, you'll find him. He's a shameless self promoter with semi-authentic gimmiks.

abundance

Ronald Regan, had the trickle down theory. its simple.sorta like the stimulus package all nations are singing about
see first thing you do is give rich people more money, then they spend it on new stuff, and hand over their old stuff to poorer folks, or them spending money will create better opportunities for the others.
Abundance is a theory, which according to Oprah http://abundancesecrets.com/ and the folks that brought you the secret http://www.thesecret.tv/ we wil spread the wealth. Sorry i don"t buy it.
I am willing to go along with it.i want to see it work, but here are my concerns;
-

1. If its really cheap and plentiful we will squander it (go to a buffet. Nuff said.)

-
2. Usually those that really need the things that are plentiful are prevented from aquiring it

-
3. As long as greed rules the day, we will burn food before we give it away

-
4. the cheap transistors,metals,etc are cheap because we exploit others to maintain high profit margin here.

can we have abundance and spread the wealth.

Maybe we can figure out what the real cost of goods are.Lets look at the wages of everyone on the surply side, not just when it arrives in North america.
its not cheap! the actual machines we use to read,listen and copy all this material,have a cost.
look at all the metals the plastics that are used. include all the landfills the old stuff takes up, all the toxic sludge. Think of all the places these things are quietly shipped off to so we can get the next faster,brighter, higher resolutioned,voice activated thing.

lets think of the time a writer will spend gathering information and putting it out. for what? In the music/ entertainment industry, they have the "pay to play" mentality,entertainers spend more money trying to get paid than they do getting paid,but, the bar gets paid,the beer company gets paid, printer gets paid, the musical instrument companies get paid,
etc etc,, and we get to listen for free? I love the idea of abundance, so we can get on with the real things in the world but, damn!lets not kid ourselves, abundance and scarcity are twins. We know if we aint on one side of the coin we on the other.
one thing for sure, or i think its for sure. At the end of the day with digital technology. Those that own the technology will rule.We still need macs to interface or IBms to get digital cash. we still gonna use cannon digital cameras to Take the family pic or the video. The platform all this runs on is??? a hundred years ago somone said if you hand land you were free. well i think its gone digital now.

free lunch

FREE LUNCH
Yeah! I’ll take One. I really like the new exciting world that we live in, but it reminds me of the guy who says “The first ones free” sure,sure you can have all the cool shit you want, but let’s face it,you’ve got to pay the price of admission. There’s no such thing as afree lunch,It comes across like an Edward Bernays pitch.
I like the idea of expanding our notion of economy. What Kelly is saying is basically, we are not really paying directly for the information, We are acquiring information,and paying for the platform on which it is delivered.It's old economics with a snazzy label. Marketing jargon, selling the same things “it’s déjà vu all over again.”
The Eight generatives, Vs the old school economic marketing 8

1.
1. Immediacy (buy Now! ) vs . convenience

2.
2. Personalization vs. Customized to suit your needs!

3.
3. Interpretation Vs. 1-800-help line, 24hr. (please read fine print, some service fees applicable.)

4.
4. Authenticity vs. This authentic Elvis plate comes with certificate,,,

5.
5. Accessibility Vs. Nationwide service desk, ready to help you ,dial 1-800,,

6.
6. Embodiment Vs. “you’ve read the book, now hear him speak, L. Ron Hubbard,,,

7.
7. Patronage Vs. “you’ve read the book, now hear him speak, L. Ron Hubbard,,,

8.
8. Findability Vs. “let your fingers do the walking”

but this is new, its a new day! free at last, free at last,,,

Get What You Want For The Price You Want By The Second

courtesy of www.automechanics.wordpress.com

Online shopping is now the way to go to get whatever you want no matter how particular it is. The other good thing is that you can get it for the price you want. You keep looking for your product on different websites that offer it for a wide range of prices and you choose the price that suits you. The consumer finally gets the final word and does not have to be in the shadow of mainstream consumption anymore as suggests Chris Anderson in his Long Tail theory.

Abundance vs Scarcity

It is incredible to know that thanks to the alternative of e-business people can actually get more for less. The range of products that are available, and probably sought by a few people, is huge but still these products exist because of that tiny demand. It is better to have these products at hand in case demands for them increase than not have them at all because only a few would be interested in them at first.

What mainstream imposes on you vs what you want

The problem with mainstream products is that they are forced on you by the likes and dislikes of other people whereas everybody has an individual taste that is certainly different from other people's. People who create them just assume that you will like them but is that always the case? Of course not and this is where Internet comes into play. In fact, it offers you the opportunity to develop uniqueness in taste and satisfies your craziest preferences by the politics of abundance. Hallelujah being different is a dream come true!!!

You look for what you want, you compare prices and decide to purchase or not. With Internet, you can do that without moving from your chair with a simple click. No pressure, no inconvenience! Save time and money!

The Long Tail article exposes the mainstream industries and makes you question whether you want to make your own decision for what you want to buy and the price you want to pay or on the contrary leave it to other people to decide for you. Well, in the end it is clear that people will choose to get way more for way less especially nowadays with the economic crisis the world is going through.

Patchwork Journalism Equals Good Trouble

Image courtesy of keithdrake.com

Participatory journalism as defined by J.D. Lasica is an undeniably sexy democratic concept. After years of swallowing hegemonic drippings from 'news that counts', with the dawning of Web 2.0, we have become our own media mongers. Nothing gets the stuffed shirts more hot and bothered than lack of quality control, and this is a beautiful thing.

David Coursey is one of many dinosaurs 'pure' journalists who fear for this model's misinforming tendencies. He points out some cheeky monkey who, in 2005, loaded a 'respectable' journalist's Wikipedia biography with false information that implicated him in both Kennedy assassinations. He was stigmatized for this gag.

Pelt me with clogs and cabbage if you must, but I find such harsh use of the technology to be pretty damn interesting, if not entertaining.

While I am all for the gradual emergence of 'truth' and alternative press via internet, chaos and falsity are far more provocative. Trash will always be more interesting than the mothball smell of old track records and reputations. Besides, it's about time us bitter members of the proletariat (the so-called 80%) stirred some unwanted brown nuggets into the elite's oatmeal.

Everyone remembers the anthrax scare that once had us all opening grandmama's letters with a gas mask and an icepick. Think of this as belated revenge; our time to shine with unfounded claims, bizarre discrepancies, and viral marketing. Petty techno-fun begets the blind consumption of fear!

Bottom-line is that - as evidenced by the two benevolent fellows in Julie's previous post - the "multiplicity of online sources" that Cory Doctorow champions continues to offer us news that is more human, less generic, and simply necessary for our evolution as a culture.

Regardless of credibility and quality control, at least this brand of happenings isn't stale or limited to one audience. The 'media monsters' that we stitch together may not be perfect, but they are hungry for change, and for a voice that operates on more than one didactic level. We'll hold each other up while the dinosaurs puppets opposition continues to try and talk us down.

Participatory Journalism Is The Way To Go

Picture courtesy of: Johntv.com

Participatory journalism is not only absolutely aw some but greatly needed. Journalists are great and truly deserve their title as professional news makers because not only is their job immensely difficult but it requires true professionalism, tenacity and credibility.

However, let's face it, the news industry is lacking and it's impossible for journalists and media giants to cover every crime,every wrongdoing,every government fall-out and that's where participatory journalism comes in. Take this guy for example, he makes a living filming traffic officers who fail to obey traffic law and order.

Jimmy Justice is famous for doing a job that is both needed and which falls, according to me, under the journalism banner. City officials are supposed to keep an eye on their officers but you and I both know that flagrant lack of time and funding makes doing so nearly impossible.

In the meantime, Jimmy Justice is giving-up some of his own time to contribute to society by exp posing those who believe themselves to be above the law. Jimmy's videos have traveled the world and have created outrage and discontent vis-a-vis law enforcement and their own lack of compliance. Personally, that is what I was taught in journalism school, to report what I feel is unjust and that seems to be Jimmy Justices' mission as well.

He's not alone either, Brian Bates is another video vigilante who goes after inner-city prostitution. He has tremendously contributed to cleaning-up his inner-city streets by cracking down on prostitution. He films, captures and sometimes arrests the offenders caught in the act all while shooting his video camera and distributing the images all over television and the web. That to me, is another example of great journalism.

Whether news comes from journalists or dedicated civilians what's the difference? What we want, or at least what I want, is to be updated and informed as much as possible. News is relative and those who report it are also, Jimmy Justice and Brian Bates do some of the best, in-your-face reporting I've seen in years and in the end, that's all that matters to me, not who reported what rather than simply good reporting.

The era of the misses

Online-shopping is a god sent gift to everyone, who is fed up with mainstream products that don´t really apply to their interests.
When people shop on the web today they have not only logged on to save a few dollars on an item that would be findable in any physical store. Many of them are instead looking for just that special book or music-track, that only can be found online because of its narrow appeal.

As described in the article The Long Tail by Chris Anderson, the market for online-shopping is just as much about the misses than about the hits, which actually means that people now have a wide selection of misses to choose from. I must agree that this is good news, not only for consumers, but just as well for the survival and development of a niche-culture.

Thanks to the web an unknown artist doesn´t necessarily need to have a big company in the back to rise to the top. If the product is good enough the word of mouth-technic can do the trick. However, in the real world the focus will probably still be on the mainstream products, as long as it doesn´t pay the movietheater-rent to show a film that isn´t promoted as a blockbuster.

But hopefully the online-shopping patterns can give the marketing executives an idea about the possibilities that the niche-market contains and prevent them from always going for the lowest common denominator. And maybe give the people something they didn´t knew they wanted.

Pirates Killed the Movie Star

Photo from cyber-knowledge.net

In his ongoing essay The Death of the Blockbuster Chris Anderson relates the decline in hit record sales and blockbuster movie attendance to a society wide change in preferences. According to his Long Tail Theory, because virtual stores offer expansive catalogues, ratings and suggestions, the mainstream market has been pulled apart and away as customer interests mature or are led off the beaten path You know what else really allows people to explore new interests? When they are available for free! Personally, even in our days of RIAA hate, I still believe that piracy should shoulder the blame for the majority of decreased sales.

Consider the stats that Chris Anderson showed off in his articles:

Both film and music sales show a decline starting at the beginning of the 21^st century. So did the new millennium have us all develop new distinguished interests? No, we just stole them from our friends! Napster was created in 1999 and only existed for two years, but it was the file-sharing figurehead (ignoring IRC etc) that launched a revolution of how we collected media. Peer-to-peer file-sharing, and more recently rampant online streaming and torrent downloads, are saving customers a trip to the movie theatre, not a varied palate. Do we really believe that millions of dollars were lost because suddenly people decided they would rather watch documentaries than The Dark Knight? No, it’s because The Dark Knight was instantly ripped onto the internet for everyone to watch for free. Granted, downloading music and movies has never made trying new things so fun and exciting, but most thieving usually is pretty thrilling. Cheap music is better than expensive music, but free is better than not free as long as you don’t get a virus.

It is up to the entertainment industry to either stem the illegal distribution of music/film/television, or else legitimize it. Apple modifying their online pricing strategy and dropping DRM software is a good start, and HBO releasing their shows online is as well (even if they aren't available in Canada yet). Pirates are only doing what big corporations have dropped the ball on: making their products accessible. With a medium like the internet which has combined just about every major communication invention of the last century, such an evolution only seems natural.

Goodbye Scarcity and Hello Abundance: An Issue of Content

The Long Trail by Chris Anderson makes known that there is a content issue. Get this, our local theaters, radio and TV networks are all affected by physical and earthbound economics. Economics, yes that old chestnut, plays a big part in this. The equation is that old school traditional economics (based in the physical market) affects content in a different way that say, the way online economics does. You see, there content is of the abundance online, yet in the non-online world products and services are made profitable by scarcity. Plus, online content can afford to be of a 'niche' nature whereas in the physical market you better make content mainstream and here’s why:


Problem #1: Involves local audiences. A good example that shows this are theaters. So, an average movie theater will not show a film unless it can attract at least 1,500 people over a two-week run.

In other words, all retailers (and it's not just theater venues) will
carry only content that can generate sufficient demand to earn its
keep.

Problem #2: Involves physical space issues. A good example that shows this limitation are Radio and TV networks. These networks struggle with physical space issues because the radio spectrum can carry only so many stations and a coaxial cable so many TV channels.

Basically networks (Radio stations and TV stations) are only put up in
geographic locations wherein there is a large audience and to keep
these existing audiences and attract new ones the content that these
networks show must be of a popularized (mainstream) caliber.

In other words, while 'earthly' theaters, TV and radio networks assume what content to make available online businesses like Amazon are turning us into the selectors of content as they make available to us all sorts of content. The World Wide Web has no space issues and can thus afford to carry substantial amounts of content (no book shelf limitations). Whereas real life and its physicality creates a lame supply and demand match the virtual leaves us up to our own devices as we hunt for information and find are not so mainstream niches.

The Mall Makes a Come-back

Photo courtesy of ralphbijker

Not everyone is as optimistic about online shopping as Julie - at least not anymore. Her post agrees with Chris Anderson's view that this new form of shopping gives the consumer an opportunity to deviate from the mainstream by providing a greater selection of products.

But a New York Times article published in 2006 offers a fresher perspective (compared to Anderson's article which was published in 2004). This new report shows that, in just two years, growth in online sales has dropped drastically.

This is because consumers are suffering from "internet fatigue". Websites are tedious and dull. Being in front of a computer feels more like work than fun. As a result, companies are working to make their stores more appealing. Friendlier employees, better lighting, and comforting decor are being implemented to make the shopping experience more pleasant.

Other companies have created a hybrid of both online and in-store shopping. Barnes and Noble is opting for a "clicks-and-bricks" model. Consumers can reserve their books online and purchase them in store. Online book clubs, forums and articles on popular authors have also been added to their website to breathe new life into their website.

The article also contradicts Anderson's argument that online shopping is cheaper. Though the prices are sometimes lower than in stores, the cost of shipping and handling has been steadily increasing. The threat of credit card fraud and identity theft could also end up costing you.

Whatever happened to going to the mall and hanging out with your friends? Shopping used to be a social experience. I used to spend entire afternoons at the mall in the small community where I grew up. It only had about ten stores. Sometimes I wouldn't even buy anything. I just liked trying clothes on and spraying my guy friends with perfume.

I think online shopping is great if you want to find something that is really hard to find in stores or to discover new products. But if you are looking for something simple, it is not only cheaper to buy it in a store, but it could also be a lot more fun!