You do know that newspapers can flip a switch that stops Google & Facebook from posting their content, right?
-
-
Replying to @JesseBrown @HeerJeet
So, either pull your content from the largest platforms or accept those platforms get all the revenue from people viewing your content? Reminds me of arguments in favour of unpaid internships
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @ndmorrison @HeerJeet
3rd option: accept that monetizing social media hits is both terrible for the quality of news and puts the fate of your news business in the hands of malevolent tech dicks, and instead build subscription-based businesses funded by people who actually care about your product.
2 replies 0 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @JesseBrown @HeerJeet
So subscription gate your content on all major platforms? I can see this working for the NYT and the Economist. You see it working for the Ottawa Citizen. Papers seeing COVID spikes still face extinction from ad collapse. https://www.niemanlab.org/2020/03/newsonomics-what-was-once-unthinkable-is-quickly-becoming-reality-in-the-destruction-of-local-news/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
You need to somehow demonstrate that subscription revenue alone can replace previous subscription+ad revenue. Outside the NYT or philanthropic backed papers, where has that happened?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ndmorrison @HeerJeet
I do? Why would you imagine that the next viable business model for news will account for every dollar lost to disruption? What entitles this industry to perpetual double-digit profit margins at corporate scale?
2 replies 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @JesseBrown @ndmorrison
What entitles Facebook & Google to profit from work done by others? There business model is an artifice created by laws, which can be changed to allow for more even distribution of revenue.
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @ndmorrison
The consent of those others to let FB & Google do so?
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @JesseBrown @ndmorrison
The same logic used to justify paying people sweatshop wages -- "they consented to it, didn't they?" But consent to a bad bargain only exists in a legal frame-work, which can be changed if needed.
3 replies 2 retweets 11 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Not so weird if you consider it applies to writers as well as media outlets. There were people who were making a living off blogging in 2008 who can't now because Google has eaten up all the ad revenue.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.