Filed under: Ways To "Save" Journalism? | Tags: Google, J.O., journalism, Journalism 24/7, Journalism Online, journalists, micropayments, model, New York Times, News Corporation, NYT
Journalism Online is a service that will ideally help news publishers to capitalize on their online content. They don’t actually supply content–they are a kind of PayPal-like middleman between readers and online news providers.
Their model presents a centralized place to pay, instead of subscribing to each individual outlet. J.O.’s service “allows customers to have one easy-to-use account common to all the publishers’ websites.”
As of right now, J.O. has quite a lot of intererested publishers (like News Corporation, Google and I.B.M. to name a few, as reported by the New York Times), and a press release in September by J.O. reported that they had recieved over 1,000 letters of intent from various magazines, newspapers and online news sites.
It looks like plently of news organizations are ready to set sail on the S.S. Journalism Online, with the fine details of costs and methods of charging yet to be hammered out. It’s a big risk for content providers, to be sure–but the fear of losing readers was one of the things that got them into this big mess to begin with, so I think that every media outlet should jump aboard.
It’s important that reputable news outlets are all in solidarity about charging for their online content–otherwise, many consumers will just keep subsisting on the free stuff. I think the informed ones among us would agree that we just can’t live without good, quality news. If there’s no substitute for it, we’ll undoubtedly pay for it. For right now, however, it’s just a matter of smart personal-spending–one doesn’t want to pay for something if they can get it somewhere else for free.
In conclusion: If they would agree, I would agree. Journalists unite!
Filed under: General Commentary, Happenings | Tags: 1984, Amazon, copyright, digital rights management, drm, e-reader, engadget.com, hearst, Kindle, magazine, meredith, News Corporation, Orwell, time inc
Four big names in publishing have joined forces to create a name-to-be-announced magazine reader that will compete with Amazon’s Kindle in the e-reader market, reports Engadget.com.
The solidarity between Time Inc., Conde Nast, Hearst, Meredith and News Corporation is what I’ve been talking about regarding the need to “unionize” in the effort for paid content. Yet another way that publishers can digitize their content without giving it away for free.
Significantly, Time Inc. executive John Squire announced that this new device will be “DRM-free.” DRM, or digital rights management, is a broad term for various access-control technologies that could potentially be used by electronics distributors to keep tabs on what their devices are being used for. Essentially, DRM technology (in hardware or software form) prevents consumers from using their new toy in a way the manufacturers don’t want. DRM helps to prevent piracy and protect copyrights, as well.
Controversy abounded when Amazon used their link to their customer’s Kindles to delete digital versions of Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm last July. From the New York Times, “Digital books bought for the Kindle are sent to it over a wireless network. Amazon can also use that network to synchronize electronic books between devices — and apparently to make them vanish…”
So if “Big Brother” Time Inc., News Corporation, et al. aren’t monitoring your patterns via their new reader, it’s a definite bonus over buying the Kindle!