And it’s a good thing. Since the newspaper industry, much like the music industry, resisted the Internet rather than embracing it, they shot themselves in the foot. Rather than proactively identifying opportunities they missed the boat entirely and are now suffering badly. Reminds me a bit of how Kodak could have OWNED digital photography if they had a bit of vision a few years ago. Instead they are playing catch-up, too.

In the newspaper’s race to play catch-up, they started giving it all away for free since that was the culture. We all grew up on a free Internet (I even remember when we used to think there would be no ads. HA) and that is being threatened in various ways.

The opportunity now is for newspaper’s to collectively demonstrate their worth by asking people to pay for the content they provide. Everything business has to do this, they have just been around so long they took their status and distribution model for granted.

I’ve been a little hard on mainstream media and probably sound like I want social media (blogs, etc.) to replace it. That’s not quite right. I believe they are complementary and both necessary. We need in-depth reporting and someone who can afford to put a correspondent in Iraq. We also need citizen journalists who are not influenced as directly by big business.

Here is a good explanation of why media must charge for web content. I think the key to pricing lies in micropayments, which use new technology to charge a very small amount of money (cents not dollars) for each piece of material you consume rather than paying full price for a newspaper you only read part of anyway. We just need to find a way to make it work on a small, local level.

Read this great article describing some real world ramifications of a future without mainstream journalism from The Atlantic. Kinda scary.

Comments(3) - Join the Conversation

Andy Swindler Categories: Entrepreneurship, General, Marketing, Social Media, Technology, Web

I was happy to let this Facebook TOS thing boil over as I expected it would, but a lot of people have been asking what I think, so I thought I’d write it down for posterity.

This is another example of what I’m starting to call corporate democracy. Facebook is the innovator in social networking, which is what makes it fun and cool. But consider that it is still not a profitable enterprise. Therefore, they also have to innovate in the revenue category. They have stepped too far a few times (the most stark example was Beacon a couple years ago), and each time the community reacts quickly and honestly.

In this case, I joined the group along with thousands protesting the new terms. In a matter of days Facebook reverted back to the original terms. In my mind, this was a non-issue. 100,000 people click a button and effect change. If only it were that easy in the political system. But then again things aren’t usually that obvious with complex issues.

I’m sure Facebook will continue to try new avenues to gain additional control over user content and find revenue streams. If they step too far, the community will push them back. Facebook knows that the social networking space is fickle (Remember Friendster?) and they don’t want to lose members. I’m not saying don’t pay attention or don’t worry about it. Nor am I saying trust the corporation and don’t worry about your privacy (be sure to set your Facebook privacy settings appropriately). But I am confident in my trust of the well-balanced relationship Facebook currently has with its constituents.

Comments(1) - Join the Conversation

Andy Swindler Categories: Entrepreneurship, Social Media, Technology, Web

In reading and thinking about Obama’s new strategies and policy recommendations, I see this fear of socialism popping up here and there. While I’m not a support of a completely socialist system, I also know that no president has the power to bend the country that far in any direction. However, clearly his plans do have a more liberal or socialist bent than we’ve seen for a long time.

What’s changed? And why might it work this time around?

The Internet has finally come of age. Facebook, MySpace, Wikipedia, and other sites have put the power of voice in the hands of the people. The only problem until now is that no one has been listening. With Obama’s deep understanding of the power of this medium, his ardent support of it, and his willingness to find solutions in the words of his constituents, I see a newfound hope that is encouraging, to say the least.

Blogs, forums, personal web sites, and comments across many sites create a network of conversation and debate that is not perfect, but is better than anything we’ve seen to date. No longer is the power of oratory limited to statesmen, scholars, elite businessmen,

For once, the government is asking for our opinions, and seems genuinely interested in what we have to say.

And for the first time in several years, we see the hope of a government that will hold itself accountable by embracing these technologies. The transparency of the Internet mandates that the people have a public voice. This voice has the power to persuade, argue, encourage, and identify wrong-doing with unprecedented equality, accuracy, and speed. Obama’s commitment to applying new marketing trends in technology to the government are enlightening:

“Among his proposals: making more government reports and data available online; Webcasts of all government meetings; and creating tech tools to allow users to track federal grants, contracts, lobbyist information and earmarks. He even proposes a five-day public comment period on any legislation pending before the White House.”

Granted there are problems. There is a great deal of noise out there, and it’s everyone’s job to sift through it. Technologies are getting better to allow us to do this, but human editors will always be necessary. A larger problem is the growing digital divide, which leaves millions of Americans out of this conversation. Democracy and equality are never comprehensive, even on the Internet, but we’re heading in the right direction.

Network Neutrality is going to be a key issue to keeping the Internet working as we know it, free and open to everyone who has access. And burgeoning organizations are focusing on the digital divide issue to make sure Broadband Internet is not a luxury, but a necessity for all Americans. Until we solve this issue and give everyone a voice, decisions will still be made by people who are not as directly affected by the results. That’s not democracy.

Comments(0) - Join the Conversation

Andy Swindler Categories: Entrepreneurship, General, Social Media, Web