Blurring Borders - Latest Comments in Should We Wish for Information Monopoly?

Re: Should We Wish for Information Monopoly?

prepbooks — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:27:34 -0000

Thanks for the informative post Kevin, you are great, keep posts like this one coming lot often, have just bookmarked you.

Re: Should We Wish for Information Monopoly?

Adam Thierer — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:29:02 -0000

The decline of newspapers comes down to the death of “protectable scarcity”. There’s just too much other competition out there online already for our eyes and ears. We’re witnessing substitution effects on a scale never seen in the media world, with disruptive digital technologies and networks splintering our attention spans. That de-massification of media means that high fixed cost endeavors like daily newspapers are not going to be able to sustain the cross-subsidies they’ve long gotten from advertisers.

Since we cannot -- and should not -- "re-create" scarcity (or local monopolies) to solve this problem, this presents challenging questions for the future of "long form" investigative journalism, which is expensive to fund and sustain. The best hope is to try to find create new cross-subsidies for investigative journalism, but where those cross-subsidies flow from is the difficult question. Non-profits? Micropayments? Google?? Who knows. Difficult days ahead no matter how you cut it. I wish I could be more optimistic, but it's hard for the reasons Zuckerman, Starr and many others note.

More here.

Re: Should We Wish for Information Monopoly?

Michael Masnick — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:58:45 -0000

No. :)

Or, more specifically, hell no.

I've yet to see a less efficient market produce more of something. Give it time. There are plenty of models that will make sense for investigative journalism... and they'll end up being better at it than the current inefficient models.

TPMmuckraker is a start. There will be more.