4 ms·

You say media companies should figure out the right business model but you yourself seem to be stuck thinking inside the old business model box. In the short te

by volaski 11y ago

You say media companies should figure out the right business model but you yourself seem to be stuck thinking inside the old business model box. In the short term it is true all the new media sites seem to be crushing it with all the eyeballs they have since the dominant revenue model for our age is advertising, but things always change. Even this online ad model was laughed at a decade ago. And it is increasingly becoming less lucrative as more and more people can publish stuff online. The only way to ensure you survive is to make sure you create a unique value. And page view is not one of them.

zmitri 11y ago
I started Beacon which funds journalism online (http://beaconreader.com http://beaconreader.com) — definitely don't fit into the old business model, but that's the game they are playing.
- jdp23 11y ago
  Impressive work on Beacon. Definitely not "old business model" :) That said I think you're undervaluing the potential of the OP. You say at [1] that one of the key things you've learned is that readers fund journalism because they care about having an impact. If successful, the approaches they're discussing could significantly increase the impact of journalists' work -- reusing the same Particles in different contexts, being able to provide multiple tailored versions of the same post that could resonate with different audiences, etc. And it also may point to ways for publishers to participate in and leverage the Buzzfeed/Facebook ecosystems while still providing additional value on their own sites/apps/publications. So, agreed that it by itself isn't a business model solution, but don't write it off so quickly ... [1] https://www.beaconreader.com/blog/beacon-immigration-3-million-to-fill-a-journalism-gap https://www.beaconreader.com/blog/beacon-immigration-3-milli...
  - zmitri 11y ago
    Maybe, but maybe lots of solutions like this already exist! Tweets, genius for annotations, facebook, youtube... I agree certain backers might care more about having an article published in x ways, but I think they are overestimating their usefulness and things like tweet embeds, youtube embeds, or using phantom js to render custom twitter cards with text PLUS the full length article do the same job more or less.

by volaski 11y ago

zmitri 11y ago

I started Beacon which funds journalism online (http://beaconreader.com http://beaconreader.com) — definitely don't fit into the old business model, but that's the game they are playing.

jdp23 11y ago
Impressive work on Beacon. Definitely not "old business model" :) That said I think you're undervaluing the potential of the OP. You say at [1] that one of the key things you've learned is that readers fund journalism because they care about having an impact. If successful, the approaches they're discussing could significantly increase the impact of journalists' work -- reusing the same Particles in different contexts, being able to provide multiple tailored versions of the same post that could resonate with different audiences, etc. And it also may point to ways for publishers to participate in and leverage the Buzzfeed/Facebook ecosystems while still providing additional value on their own sites/apps/publications. So, agreed that it by itself isn't a business model solution, but don't write it off so quickly ... [1] https://www.beaconreader.com/blog/beacon-immigration-3-million-to-fill-a-journalism-gap https://www.beaconreader.com/blog/beacon-immigration-3-milli...
- zmitri 11y ago
  Maybe, but maybe lots of solutions like this already exist! Tweets, genius for annotations, facebook, youtube... I agree certain backers might care more about having an article published in x ways, but I think they are overestimating their usefulness and things like tweet embeds, youtube embeds, or using phantom js to render custom twitter cards with text PLUS the full length article do the same job more or less.