Comments on: What does internet look like in 5 years?

By: BasL

BasL — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:47:00 +0000

You can also read it online, for free:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17135767/FREE-full-book-by-Chris-Anderson

…or download the audio version, legally – and free:
http://www.wired.com/images/multimedia/free/FREE_Audiobook_unabridged.zip

By: BasL

BasL — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:12:18 +0000

Don’t wait to long, the future is now.

Read this from Seth Godin:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/06/malcolm-is-wrong.html
on Malcolm Gladwell:
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2009/07/06/090706crbo_books_gladwell?currentPage=all

And then buy (yes, buy) this book from Chris Anderson:
http://www.amazon.com/Free-Future-Radical-Chris-Anderson/dp/1401322905

By: Diederik Heinink

Diederik Heinink — Sat, 09 May 2009 17:14:17 +0000

@Bas: haha, good one! maybe we just have to wait and see…:-)

By: BasL

BasL — Sat, 09 May 2009 15:44:23 +0000

Aah! If Rupert Murdoch says so… (I still don’t buy it.)

Another coincidence?

Free Does Not Mean No Business Model
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090507/1743534788.shtml
“We’re seeing it all the time, with content based business models that don’t rely on copyright which have been shown to be more successful than the old copyright crutch business models. There are lots of ways to make money that involve “free” as a part of the business model. “

By: Diederik Heinink

Diederik Heinink — Sat, 09 May 2009 14:17:04 +0000

what a coincidence: one day after my post, Rupert Murdoch sais: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-charging-websites

By: Diederik Heinink

Diederik Heinink — Fri, 08 May 2009 08:21:48 +0000

Websites have to earn their money somehow and ads, sponsors and partners won´t fill the bucket.

I´m sure visitors/members are pleased to pay a bit for quality content. Operational costs of websites are low, so price strategies cannot be compared to conventional media.

Let´s talk again in five years:-)

By: BasL

BasL — Thu, 07 May 2009 11:22:39 +0000

A more recent article on TechDirt quotes an article that does explain why paid (news) content is a bad idea:

“In short, subscriptions are self-limiting. But that’s only half the story. The other half is this: Your content — that term is always going to grate — is your own best advertisement.”
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090506/0252024766.shtml

By: Diederik Heinink

Diederik Heinink — Thu, 07 May 2009 10:06:34 +0000

@Bas: read the articles: very interesting! totally agree with the revolutionary changes in the media landscape. magazines and papers hjave had their best times. they will not disappear, but they won´t grow further, unless linked to the internet.

didn´t read a lot of evidence on the paid content part though…

By: Diederik Heinink

Diederik Heinink — Wed, 06 May 2009 16:57:50 +0000

Hi Bas,

Thanks for your comment.

Because content is so easy to copy and spread around the world via the internet I think there is a big difference with conventional media.

I do believe though that part of the internet will remain free, but there will be partitions on the www that you have to pay for somehow. How else you think you can protect content? I am curious to hear your thoughts on this.

I did not study the subject thoroughly, so this is purely based on personal assumptions. Let me go and read the articles you sent me. Thanks for that!

By: BasL

BasL — Wed, 06 May 2009 16:42:26 +0000

Hi Diederik,

Oh, do I have to disagree with you on this: The internet will definitely not change to a pay-per-use content platform. Professionalization will happen. Content will still be King. But payed-for-content is not the only model and probably not the winning one. Newspapers have already tried and failed at that.

I think you should read this one:
http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2009/03/newspapers-and-thinking-the-unthinkable/
(long but worth it)

And also:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071227/015035.shtml
(and many other articles on this site)

Grtz,

Bas