In discussing where we went wrong, a panel of luminaries, including Vint Cerf and the Internet Archive’s Brewster Kahle, sees three Cs: centralization, copyright, and competition.
In discussing where we went wrong, a panel of luminaries, including Vint Cerf and the Internet Archive’s Brewster Kahle, sees three Cs: centralization, copyright, and competition.
The argument that paywalls somehow ruin the open parts of the Web always fell flat for me. It is trivial to contribute to the Web for free if one wishes. Nobody is forced to paywall their content.
Yeah the implicit argument, to me at least, was that all journalism should be free. Which, sure but that’s a way larger discussion than just the internet. We’d need radically new funding models etc.
It used to be if you wanted the detailed news you had to pay for it, either a subscription or 25¢ for that day’s edition ($1 on Sunday). But it was really easy to get that day’s edition: just stick a quarter in the dispenser.
We need to find a way to make that work. I wouldn’t mind paying 50¢ or $1 for access to one day’s-worth of articles, but the payment processing fees eat away all the money on such small transactions. I also don’t necessarily want to set up an account for some random local newspaper on the other side of the country that I’m looking at this one time and might never look at again. It feels like these should be solvable problems, though.
Great points!
I absolutely fully agree. Honestly, I think some sort of micro transaction system would be the answer to ubiquitous advertising etc.
Yeah exactly, well said. I think for a lot of people the advent of paywalls felt like taking away a free thing, instead of a return to the norm. Personally when it comes to journalism I prefer a paywall to advertiser-supported.
Yeah, I think you got it exactly. Once we get used to a thing for free, we get very annoyed when it is no longer free.
And fully agree with paywalled/paid journalism versus the hellish race to the bottom engendered by advertiser supported news.