http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2002-2006 by the authors Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:54:31 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/11/004253.php#comment-33620 I've never paid for content on the Internet, but my demands are different from Anita's -- I'm not in business and anything I've ever wanted (within reason) I've always been able to get for nothing. When, like me, one of your main demands from the Internet is good reading material, it remains a very dicey proposition as to whether people will pay for content. Look at two of the long-competing online magazines, slate.com and salon.com. Although backed by Microsoft, Slate had a long-term goal of becoming a site that could eventually pay for itself with annual subscriptions, but that proved to be a complete non-starter; as founding editor Michael Kinsley eventually put it, "people are too damn cheap." More than that, I think in order to charge money a site has to have something to really sell -- something people simply can't get anywhere else. The JJHill site is probably a good example, as is the payy-only Wall Street Journal. Good writers and good journalism aren't enough -- because there is so much good writing and good journalism on the Internet that costs nothing. The same goes for poor old salon.com, which became a pay site and spent many months -- most of it on life-support -- begging someone, anyone to pay to read what they offered. They still do, although they now have this deal where you can get a "free day pass" if you agree to sit through the on-line commercial of a sponsoring company, which I frequently agree to do. I think in terms of magazines and newspapers, paying for content remains a bit of a dream. ]]> 33620@blogcritics.org Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:54:31 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/11/004253.php#comment-32255 Bruce, great observation. One way or another someone somewhere pays for the information we consume, whether directly through subscriptions, or indirectly through tax dollars to support libraries or conduct census surveys, or through being bombarded with annoying ads, or.... Anita ]]> 32255@blogcritics.org Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:59:50 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/11/004253.php#comment-32254 I will go through great lengths to not pay for the newspaper that gets delivered to my house, but they always manage to track me down. Information is never free, it's just that sometimes we can find someone to subsidize our cost. ]]> 32254@blogcritics.org Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:41:12 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/11/004253.php#comment-32216 i will pay for content on the 'net only if i know it's worth it. And if i needed a business resource, it does sound like this site would be worth it, however the sad fact is that when it comes to sites that offer paid content, the vast majority do not offer value for money, and i believe it is because they have been set up by people hoping to make a fast buck, who haven't actually spent much time making their site and content worth paying for. ]]> 32216@blogcritics.org Thu, 11 Dec 2003 06:37:57 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/11/004253.php#comment-32209 I will go through great lengths to not pay for content on line. I'm too used to being able to find all I need for free. ]]> 32209@blogcritics.org Thu, 11 Dec 2003 02:31:39 EST