Linked by Mufasa on Tue 13th Jul 2010 15:57 UTC
Editorial I read David's post worrying about the end of the free internet and I had to respond, as I strongly disagree that free and advertising-supported content is the future. If anything, it is advertising-supported content that is destined to be a niche strategy, because of new internet technology that enables entirely new models and empowers consumers to have exactly what they want. Advertising will not support much content creation, so I suggest what will.
Permalink for comment 433389
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
AOL works better
by whartung on Tue 13th Jul 2010 16:56 UTC
Member since:

Taking the example of OSNews, I wouldn't want to pay "just" for OSNews. I'd want to pay for OSNews, and "everything" it links to. Some sites have vast amounts of original content, but many more sites are aggregators of external content. OSNews is one of those sites.

So paying for OSNews doesn't buy me much. But being with a conglomerate of affiliated sites that all have "mostly" what I want, then I can "pay once, pay rarely" and not continue to slam in to paywalls of content that they link to.

Also the one problem you neglect with regards to micropayments is that unlike browsers cookies and pseudonomynous login handles, when it comes to cash money, the people being paid like to know who's paying them, and the people paying like to know where it's going.

Ubiquitous micro-payments (and their requirement) effectively eliminates what little anonymity is left on the internet, and many folks prize that quite highly.

While "single sign on" is not prevalent yet, "Common sign on" is. Many sites are supporting the like of OpenID and other federated authentication services. What gets annoying is when you log in with OpenID and it wants a user name, password, and demographics anyway (what was the point of my logging in via OpenID then?).

If payments sites are the way of the future, then conglomerates will grow grouping large arrays of content providers under an umbrella to handle all of the book keeping and other headaches that occur when people take money for service.

Consider the problem "Dear Webmaster, your site dinged me $0.15 for articles that came over badly/low quality/disconnected/etc. etc. Please consume $15 of your staff time to refund me my $0.15. Thanx!"

You may decry "It's just $0.15!" Yea, but it's my $0.15, and it adds up. Obviously it adds up or the website wouldn't be charging it in the first place.

That kind of customer support and bookeeping is best done in a more central organization for efficiency than having every mom and pop web site having to deal with that traffic. This is another reason micro-payments don't work.

Reply Score: 4