4 ms·
Yes, but you might discover that your content is not valuable. People are willing to pay for content that is valuable. LWN [1] and the No Agenda Show [2] prove
by infamouscow 11y ago
Yes, but you might discover that your content is not valuable.
People are willing to pay for content that is valuable. LWN [1] and the No Agenda Show [2] prove that you don't need ads to produce content that is leagues beyond any ad-supported content.
The underlying reason most newspapers are dying is because they aren't doing anything but regergitating the Associated Press and Reuters. There's no difference between a thoughtful, well investigated new article, and one that's a rehash of the Associated Press or Reuters. Why go through all the work of confirming with credible sources, looking through documents, and interviewing experts when you can get the same number of page views from a syndicated article.
1: https://lwn.net/ https://lwn.net/
2: http://www.noagendashow.com/ http://www.noagendashow.com/
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoI got lost. Your content is not valueable, ok plausible. Then, newspapers are dying because they only show (valuable) articles? I think rather, its not the value of the information that's at issue. Its the monopoly on the source that's valuable. Once the monopoly is gone, once you can get the same stuff for free somewhere else, then nobody pays. And all information on the web is free somewhere.
- infamouscow 11y agoI think if you remove the ads on your website and put up a donations/patreon link you may be pleasantly surprised that nobody feels that your content is worth paying for.