Kiss Internet Surfing Goodbye

[eunhye]

Diller Calls Free Web Content a ‘Myth, Joins Refrain (Update1) - Bloomberg.com

Diller, 67, joined a group of media chiefs, from Liberty Media Corp.’s John Malone to Walt Disney Co. CEO Robert Iger, who are challenging the accepted model that consumers pay for Internet access and then content is free. Diller predicted there will be three revenue streams: advertising, subscriptions and transactions.

Disney, the world’s biggest media company, is developing a subscription-based product for the Internet, Iger said on July 22 at the conference.

The Burbank, California-based company has opportunities to increase sales from the Web, Iger said. Online advertising can be improved, and marketers can target consumers by tracking their activities and interests. Subscription products are particularly promising to the company.

I pay $X amount for Unlimited internet access. Nothing is free anymore.

[Ruiner]

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUU

[Maxxthepenguin]

File this under shit that corporations dream of that isn't going to happen

[Ivve]

How could the average person afford to even browse if it were necessary to pay some kind of membership/subscription fee for all content?

[Headspace]

Does it matter? There will always be a free provider.

[Cletis]

[Ivve]

Just saying, do these people even think shit through? I don't know how they think this is even possible, let alone a good idea. Even $5 a month per site would become backbreaking exceptionally quickly.

[Insanecyclone]

Ones does not simply own the internet

[Not Kuno]

Just saying, do these people even think shit through? I don't know how they think this is even possible, let alone a good idea. Even $5 a month per site would become backbreaking exceptionally quickly.

They're just trolling us.

[Ivve]

Must be. There's no other explanation.

Additionally: I've only ever paid for a handful of subscriptions to things, and that was years and years ago because I wanted to view content without ads on some sites. I have adblock now so payment doesn't even cross my mind anymore, but there's no way I'd pay for a subscription to anything that's still going to toss ads at me that I have to go out of my way to block, just on principle. Fuck them.

[Milton]

reminds me of this article i read recently, where the Associated Press wants it to be illegal for you to place links to news articles anywhere, on a blog or search engine etc. and for you to have to pay for every single news article that you read online. i think that it comes down to just basically, old people don't get how the internet works.

[TacoTaru]

reminds me of this article i read recently, where the Associated Press wants it to be illegal for you to place links to news articles anywhere, on a blog or search engine etc. and for you to have to pay for every single news article that you read online. i think that it comes down to just basically, old people don't get how the internet works.

There's a bit of a difference with AP and that's that the newspaper industry fucked up by not having a business model for the internet. They tried to hold out and compete with other big news sites by staying with the paper end, and when they had to go online to start competing they began losing all their money because they had no way to generate it. At least in AP's case I can understand why they're trying to do it; to recuperate lost revenue because newspapers are becoming a thing of the past and online news doesn't have it's business model yet.

[Zilong]

Well, there is the whole part where you can get made up news anywhere on the internet to begin with.

[Correction]

Did we go back in time to 2001 or something?

Nobody pays for editorial content: Slate drops subscription fees - CNET News
Nobody pays for creative content: ComicSpace Blog Blog Archive Burns Takes Over — Modern Tales Will be (Mostly) Free!

And nobody is going to pay for the content of a company whose business model is to plunder public-domain fiction and lock it behind trademark in perpituity.

[Atreides]

keep in mind Disney used to see fit to charge television subscribers a monthly fee over and beyond their cable bills for their shit-ass Disney channel, not they can hardly give away 10 of those channels for free.

[Hosom]

Won't happen. People don't like change, and no one will pay for it etc. Just like when Time Warner started their testing for charging people by how much bandwidth they use. Internet Service isn't expensive to provide. Websites generally use advertisements to break even, and many times profit.

[Zosi]

The AP plan:

http://imgur.com/DzZdf.jpg


The real AP plan, spoilered because AP has no idea how to resize images:

Spoiler: show

http://www.ap.org/media/images/APnewsregistry.jpg

[Ksandra]

keep in mind Disney used to see fit to charge television subscribers a monthly fee over and beyond their cable bills for their shit-ass Disney channel, not they can hardly give away 10 of those channels for free.

In their defense, at the time they were grouped up with companies like Showtime and HBO which did the same. Also Nickelodeon used to have to be paid for so it's just a sign of that time period.

I actually missed when Disney was paid for only, because it was actually a good channel back then. It used to show a shitton of movies, and I loved their shows as a kid. They also showed old adult movies at night which I loved. i.e. Beatles movies!



Reality is that Roy Disney should have found a way to keep it in the family when he retired. Eisner brought the company to shit to the point that Disney had to come back and kick him out.


This new CEO doesn't sound like he's much better either...

[Maguspk]

The AP plan:

http://imgur.com/DzZdf.jpg


The real AP plan, spoilered because AP has no idea how to resize images:

Spoiler: show

http://www.ap.org/media/images/APnewsregistry.jpg

Oh GOD, did I laugh at that.

[sephir]

I remember reading an article somewhere that had a title something along the lines of "Is Google a monopoly?" Essentially the author stated some of the copyright laws and claimed that under the Predatory pricing model, Google, and the entire internet is actually illegal (I think the laws have been modified since then). Although the costs for a single person to access the site could be in the ten-thousandth of a cent there is still a cost and to make it free actually makes the company sell their product below cost.


Honestly I dont see it working out because the whole idea of the internet is to provide information to the masses. Whether this be in the form of news, advertising, books or music. Anyone who does lobby for this sort of change is stupid beyond belief.