Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentTimeJul 2nd 2009
    This debate is being tangled by people who want a great fight, but I want to see what minds like ours at Whitechapel have on this topic, so I'm going to risk some of the confusion and drop some links on you, in case you haven't been following this one:

    Chris Anderson wrote a book called Free, about freemium content and future distribution and the value of media.

    Malcolm Gladwell reviewed it in the New Yorker.

    Anderson responded to that on his blog, The Long Tail.

    The Awl responded, calling Anderson's approach "neo-feudal." (I saw this through Clayton Cubitt.)

    Seth Godin disagrees with Malcolm Gladwell.

    The Times Online weighs in.

    There are a couple of different issues being argued past each other here, though. Is Free the future? Is paying writers a thing of the past? Should newspapers be written by volunteers? It's a lovely tangle.

    Assuming you've been watching some of this, given your interests here at Whitechapel, what do you think?
  1.  (6279.2)
    Whatever business model works.
    Sometimes it makes sense to give shit away, sometimes it makes sense to have the punters pay for the shit, and sometimes it makes sense to have a mixed model of free/ad-supported/"premium" shit.
    In the matter of media not subsidized by the government, things will sort themselves out.
    Of course, we'll all be dead by then, but that's another story.