Native advertising and embedded commercials aren't new, it's as old as TV itself. Looking back to the '40s for a solution to a modern technological problem is IMO lazy.
We have the creative ability and technology to get out of the paradigm of ad-based revenue being the only viable solution. The only thing stopping it is the entrenched mindset that ads are the easy way. Alternatives are popping up all over the place.
I'm not claiming to know what the solution is, I'm saying that there is a solution to the ad problem, and it requires creative thought and new ideas - not artificial technical limitations spurred on by guilt trips.
Well, sure... What is a value of a game reviewer, news podcaster, "let's play" video maker? I certainly enjoy a lot of them, but I wouldn't pay a subscription fee for any, practically no one would. Does that mean their work is worthless?
Not worthless at all... but maybe it's not a business. Maybe it's a hobby, and most people don't get paid for hobbies.
That being said, if a 'hobby' gathers 5-10k followers, and you can get 5% of your most loyal followers to donate $1/mo (which has been proven time and again to be quite possible) you can make some decent side-income off of it, maybe even enough to pay the rent.
Again, I'm not even against ads myself... My problem is when people blame users instead of giving any real thought to identifying the problem and finding a real solution to it.
Honestly, I find your post quite insulting. Really, a person who creates awesome content, doesn't deserve to get paid, just because he enjoyed creating that content? A person who can't come up with some intricate scheme to monetize his work is lazy?
We, as society, need to move in entirely the opposite direction and make earning money easier, for people who crate good content.
Really, a person who creates awesome content, doesn't deserve to get paid, just because he enjoyed creating that content?
I'm really not sure how you got that out of my comment. I specifically stated the opposite. Not sure how to explain it any other way.
We, as society, need to move in entirely the opposite direction and make earning money easier, for people who crate good content.
Again, I agree with that... but think ads are NOT WORKING, as stated in the original article, because of TECHNICAL REALITIES. We need a different way, and the potential is endless.
It isn't about every individual content creator having to come up with some 'intricate scheme' - it's about a new, simple solution being found by the industry or society as a whole.
I feel like you are not really considering what I'm saying, as you are asserting that I'm expressing the exact opposite of what I am saying.
I'm really not sure how you got that out of my comment.
You essentially said, that it's okay for someone to not get paid for his hobby, even when that hobby provides value to people, right? That's the same attitude, that a lot of people showed when discussing paid mods, as if that would be so wrong, for someone to ask money for work he enjoyed doing. But whatever, that's offtopic anyway.
it's about a new, simple solution being found by the industry or society as a whole
Right, but money comes either from advertisement/sponsorship or from end users and end users aren't going to pay for anything, that they can avoid paying for. If we want to get rid of advertisements, I see only two paths, one is where everything is behind a paywall and you can't get anything for free; other is where a massive change in attitude happens and people start donating regularly. In reality, that isn't going to happen and advertisements aren't going anywhere. They work just fine, same as they have worked since before Internet, but on Internet they don't work for certain audiences and content creators are moving away from those audiences.
I don't like advertisement any more than the next person and I would love for something like Flattr to really take off, but I just don't think it's possible.
You essentially said, that it's okay for someone to not get paid for his hobby
I said that the value is dependent on the number of followers, and the level of engagement of said followers. Your analogy of the paid mods completely misinterprets what I said. If anything, what I'm saying supports 'paid mods' not denounces them.
end users aren't going to pay for anything, that they can avoid paying for.
That is an assumption that has been proven wrong over and over again. I myself have donated to podcasts, musicians at bandcamp.com, etc. In my original comment I linked to Patreon and the Flattr idea is another great example.
The fact that you don't think it's possible speaks directly to the entrenchment I am talking about. Participate, share the idea. Pessimism, and complacently embracing the status-quo never achieved anything worthwhile in the history of mankind.
If you think it's a good idea, do it. If you don't, then continue with ad-supported media... but don't blame users for using ad-blocking software when it's an existing technology that is becoming more and more ubiquitous.
That is like the music industry suing users in the mid 2000s instead of offering a reality-based, realistically-valued digital distribution method... like we have in spades a decade later. You can't just denounce reality and expect it to change.
That is an assumption that has been proven wrong over and over again.
Has it really? I would think, that getting gamers to voluntarily pay for anything would be a huge challenge, when they so often aren't willing to even pay for games they're playing. Sure, there are some successful Patreons and Kickstarters and whatnot, but it's not as simple as replacing ads with a donation button, that isn't going to work for the wast majority of content creators. When even Wikipedia, a resource used by half a billion people each month, struggles to get donations, what chances does everyone else have? I agree with you, that donations would be the ideal future, but I don't share your optimism.
Native advertising and embedded commercials aren't new, it's as old as TV itself. Looking back to the '40s for a solution to a modern technological problem is IMO lazy.
We have the creative ability and technology to get out of the paradigm of ad-based revenue being the only viable solution. The only thing stopping it is the entrenched mindset that ads are the easy way. Alternatives are popping up all over the place.
I'm not claiming to know what the solution is, I'm saying that there is a solution to the ad problem, and it requires creative thought and new ideas - not artificial technical limitations spurred on by guilt trips.
Not worthless at all... but maybe it's not a business. Maybe it's a hobby, and most people don't get paid for hobbies.
That being said, if a 'hobby' gathers 5-10k followers, and you can get 5% of your most loyal followers to donate $1/mo (which has been proven time and again to be quite possible) you can make some decent side-income off of it, maybe even enough to pay the rent.
Again, I'm not even against ads myself... My problem is when people blame users instead of giving any real thought to identifying the problem and finding a real solution to it.
Honestly, I find your post quite insulting. Really, a person who creates awesome content, doesn't deserve to get paid, just because he enjoyed creating that content? A person who can't come up with some intricate scheme to monetize his work is lazy?
We, as society, need to move in entirely the opposite direction and make earning money easier, for people who crate good content.
I'm really not sure how you got that out of my comment. I specifically stated the opposite. Not sure how to explain it any other way.
Again, I agree with that... but think ads are NOT WORKING, as stated in the original article, because of TECHNICAL REALITIES. We need a different way, and the potential is endless.
It isn't about every individual content creator having to come up with some 'intricate scheme' - it's about a new, simple solution being found by the industry or society as a whole.
I feel like you are not really considering what I'm saying, as you are asserting that I'm expressing the exact opposite of what I am saying.
You essentially said, that it's okay for someone to not get paid for his hobby, even when that hobby provides value to people, right? That's the same attitude, that a lot of people showed when discussing paid mods, as if that would be so wrong, for someone to ask money for work he enjoyed doing. But whatever, that's offtopic anyway.
Right, but money comes either from advertisement/sponsorship or from end users and end users aren't going to pay for anything, that they can avoid paying for. If we want to get rid of advertisements, I see only two paths, one is where everything is behind a paywall and you can't get anything for free; other is where a massive change in attitude happens and people start donating regularly. In reality, that isn't going to happen and advertisements aren't going anywhere. They work just fine, same as they have worked since before Internet, but on Internet they don't work for certain audiences and content creators are moving away from those audiences.
I don't like advertisement any more than the next person and I would love for something like Flattr to really take off, but I just don't think it's possible.
I said that the value is dependent on the number of followers, and the level of engagement of said followers. Your analogy of the paid mods completely misinterprets what I said. If anything, what I'm saying supports 'paid mods' not denounces them.
That is an assumption that has been proven wrong over and over again. I myself have donated to podcasts, musicians at bandcamp.com, etc. In my original comment I linked to Patreon and the Flattr idea is another great example.
The fact that you don't think it's possible speaks directly to the entrenchment I am talking about. Participate, share the idea. Pessimism, and complacently embracing the status-quo never achieved anything worthwhile in the history of mankind.
If you think it's a good idea, do it. If you don't, then continue with ad-supported media... but don't blame users for using ad-blocking software when it's an existing technology that is becoming more and more ubiquitous.
That is like the music industry suing users in the mid 2000s instead of offering a reality-based, realistically-valued digital distribution method... like we have in spades a decade later. You can't just denounce reality and expect it to change.
Has it really? I would think, that getting gamers to voluntarily pay for anything would be a huge challenge, when they so often aren't willing to even pay for games they're playing. Sure, there are some successful Patreons and Kickstarters and whatnot, but it's not as simple as replacing ads with a donation button, that isn't going to work for the wast majority of content creators. When even Wikipedia, a resource used by half a billion people each month, struggles to get donations, what chances does everyone else have? I agree with you, that donations would be the ideal future, but I don't share your optimism.