<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New York Times Calls Free Brigade&#8217;s Bluff</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/</link>
	<description>Entrepreneurship, marketing, personal devlelopment</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:38:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gaseous Brainstorm: What&#8217;s the Future of Publishing and How Will We Pay for It?&#160;&#124;&#160;Products of a Gaseous Brain</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-14754</link>
		<dc:creator>Gaseous Brainstorm: What&#8217;s the Future of Publishing and How Will We Pay for It?&#160;&#124;&#160;Products of a Gaseous Brain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:52:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-14754</guid>
		<description>[...] This article by Jonathan Fields is an interesting take on the latest developments, and continues the ongoing debate around &#8216;Free&#8217; which Chris Anderson&#8217;s book recently sparked off. Whether you&#8217;re talking about newspapers, music, or any kind of creative endeavour, it&#8217;s a fascinating debate because no one really knows how things will develop yet. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This article by Jonathan Fields is an interesting take on the latest developments, and continues the ongoing debate around &#8216;Free&#8217; which Chris Anderson&#8217;s book recently sparked off. Whether you&#8217;re talking about newspapers, music, or any kind of creative endeavour, it&#8217;s a fascinating debate because no one really knows how things will develop yet. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gaseous Brainstorm: What&#8217;s the Future of Publishing and How Will We Pay for It?&#160;&#124;&#160;Milo McLaughlin</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-14414</link>
		<dc:creator>Gaseous Brainstorm: What&#8217;s the Future of Publishing and How Will We Pay for It?&#160;&#124;&#160;Milo McLaughlin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Apr 2010 12:31:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-14414</guid>
		<description>[...] This article by Jonathan Fields is an interesting take on the latest developments, and continues the ongoing debate around &#8216;Free&#8217; which Chris Anderson&#8217;s book recently sparked off. Whether you&#8217;re talking about newspapers, music, or any kind of creative endeavour, it&#8217;s a fascinating debate because no one really knows how things will develop yet. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This article by Jonathan Fields is an interesting take on the latest developments, and continues the ongoing debate around &#8216;Free&#8217; which Chris Anderson&#8217;s book recently sparked off. Whether you&#8217;re talking about newspapers, music, or any kind of creative endeavour, it&#8217;s a fascinating debate because no one really knows how things will develop yet. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom of Oral Answers</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-13700</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom of Oral Answers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:39:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-13700</guid>
		<description>As a second-year dental student, I couldn&#039;t help but share my opinion on your &quot;advertising-supported dentistry model.&quot;  

The reason there are so many bloggers out there providing free content is because people like to write.  Most of the bloggers find it enjoyable.  Also, there are really no barriers to entry.  It is free for anyone to start a blog on wordpress, blogger, typepad, etc.  Internet access is available for free as well at most any public library.

Equating this to dentistry is rather ridiculous.  After four years of dental school, I will have roughly $328,000 in student loans to pay back.  While I find dentistry interesting and stimulating, it is hard work.  No dentist would be able to stay in business by using a strictly advertising-supported model.  However, there are many bloggers that can do this.

I think there is something about creating content (either written or visual such as a photographer) that people enjoy and label as hobbies.  As long as there are individuals that keep putting out quality content for little to no compensation, I think it will be harder and harder for the professional writers to make a serious living.  I think the same is true for photography.  There are many amateur photographers posting thousands of photos each day online for others to freely use.  This is making many professional photographers&#039; jobs irrelevant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a second-year dental student, I couldn&#8217;t help but share my opinion on your &#8220;advertising-supported dentistry model.&#8221;  </p>
<p>The reason there are so many bloggers out there providing free content is because people like to write.  Most of the bloggers find it enjoyable.  Also, there are really no barriers to entry.  It is free for anyone to start a blog on wordpress, blogger, typepad, etc.  Internet access is available for free as well at most any public library.</p>
<p>Equating this to dentistry is rather ridiculous.  After four years of dental school, I will have roughly $328,000 in student loans to pay back.  While I find dentistry interesting and stimulating, it is hard work.  No dentist would be able to stay in business by using a strictly advertising-supported model.  However, there are many bloggers that can do this.</p>
<p>I think there is something about creating content (either written or visual such as a photographer) that people enjoy and label as hobbies.  As long as there are individuals that keep putting out quality content for little to no compensation, I think it will be harder and harder for the professional writers to make a serious living.  I think the same is true for photography.  There are many amateur photographers posting thousands of photos each day online for others to freely use.  This is making many professional photographers&#8217; jobs irrelevant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Someone Always Pays: The Truth About Blogs and Money</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-13453</link>
		<dc:creator>Someone Always Pays: The Truth About Blogs and Money</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-13453</guid>
		<description>[...] said it in my recent posts on the NY Times putting up a paywall, bloggers getting paid for their content, my take on the errant ways of the free brigade and plenty [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] said it in my recent posts on the NY Times putting up a paywall, bloggers getting paid for their content, my take on the errant ways of the free brigade and plenty [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: roleta</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-12629</link>
		<dc:creator>roleta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 17:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-12629</guid>
		<description>Sometimes it&#039;s really that simple, isn&#039;t it? I feel a little stupid for not thinking of this myself/earlier, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes it&#8217;s really that simple, isn&#8217;t it? I feel a little stupid for not thinking of this myself/earlier, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nikki</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-12572</link>
		<dc:creator>Nikki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-12572</guid>
		<description>I suppose the success will depend on how many people who visited truly valued something extra that they brought to the table that other sites do not have, and how many of those people might have made them money through advertising or another means.

My personal opinion is no, I never saw anything there that I couldn&#039;t get elsewhere. I read the news and that&#039;s about it. I don&#039;t care what their opinion on the news is.
Since they&#039;re going to a paid model, I stopped bothering to follow them on Twitter or visit the site at all. I don&#039;t feel like I&#039;m missing out.
Could they have made money from me? Not with the typical ads used these days. Ads today are annoying and blocked as much as possible. Might they have created additional content I would have paid for -- non-news content? Possibly. We&#039;ll never know, as I won&#039;t be going back.

A bookstore doesn&#039;t charge you to walk in the door. Some let you browse the books and magazines. Heck, the Border&#039;s over here has chairs and a reading spot. All free. Plenty to buy and they obviously sell plenty. The internet is more like a bookstore than a dentist&#039;s office, I think.

When I buy something at Borders, there is a trust there. When I see online ads next to stories, I dismiss them immediately because they&#039;re all garbage. If sites stopped using so much deceptive, annoying advertising and sold their own products and services, I think a lot more people would buy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suppose the success will depend on how many people who visited truly valued something extra that they brought to the table that other sites do not have, and how many of those people might have made them money through advertising or another means.</p>
<p>My personal opinion is no, I never saw anything there that I couldn&#8217;t get elsewhere. I read the news and that&#8217;s about it. I don&#8217;t care what their opinion on the news is.<br />
Since they&#8217;re going to a paid model, I stopped bothering to follow them on Twitter or visit the site at all. I don&#8217;t feel like I&#8217;m missing out.<br />
Could they have made money from me? Not with the typical ads used these days. Ads today are annoying and blocked as much as possible. Might they have created additional content I would have paid for &#8212; non-news content? Possibly. We&#8217;ll never know, as I won&#8217;t be going back.</p>
<p>A bookstore doesn&#8217;t charge you to walk in the door. Some let you browse the books and magazines. Heck, the Border&#8217;s over here has chairs and a reading spot. All free. Plenty to buy and they obviously sell plenty. The internet is more like a bookstore than a dentist&#8217;s office, I think.</p>
<p>When I buy something at Borders, there is a trust there. When I see online ads next to stories, I dismiss them immediately because they&#8217;re all garbage. If sites stopped using so much deceptive, annoying advertising and sold their own products and services, I think a lot more people would buy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Whose Blog Would You Pay to Read?</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-12424</link>
		<dc:creator>Whose Blog Would You Pay to Read?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:18:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-12424</guid>
		<description>[...] for updates on this topic.Powered by WP Greet BoxAround the same time I shared my thoughts on the New York Times&#8217; decision to put up a paywall last week, Fred Wilson shared his thoughts: I like the subscription model the FT (Financial Times) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] for updates on this topic.Powered by WP Greet BoxAround the same time I shared my thoughts on the New York Times&#8217; decision to put up a paywall last week, Fred Wilson shared his thoughts: I like the subscription model the FT (Financial Times) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hugh</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-12213</link>
		<dc:creator>Hugh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:42:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-12213</guid>
		<description>Say it ain&#039;t so, Jonathan!  I read about the possibility of NYT doing this, but I didn&#039;t think it would happen.  NYT&#039;s website is usually the first place I go to get my news and I do agree that the paper has tremendous value to me.  However, for me, it comes down to substitute products.  NYT is going to have a lot of trouble at the beginning because there are so many substitute products - other news cites, blogs, Twitter, zines, radio, etc... As long as there are reliable substitutes, I won&#039;t be paying for NYT content.  However, as more news sources switch to pay-to-read models, I may find myself back at NYT.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Say it ain&#8217;t so, Jonathan!  I read about the possibility of NYT doing this, but I didn&#8217;t think it would happen.  NYT&#8217;s website is usually the first place I go to get my news and I do agree that the paper has tremendous value to me.  However, for me, it comes down to substitute products.  NYT is going to have a lot of trouble at the beginning because there are so many substitute products &#8211; other news cites, blogs, Twitter, zines, radio, etc&#8230; As long as there are reliable substitutes, I won&#8217;t be paying for NYT content.  However, as more news sources switch to pay-to-read models, I may find myself back at NYT.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karilee</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-12209</link>
		<dc:creator>Karilee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-12209</guid>
		<description>The currency of the web is attention, but here&#039;s the kicker: your attention requires your time, and there&#039;s a limited supply of that. Unless your time is worth nothing to you, at some point it&#039;s &quot;cheaper&quot; to pay cash for what you need.

Therefore, the best sources of the information that solve your problems, the ones that aggregate and concentrate the answers you want, or those that best fit the niche you&#039;re querying, will always be worth paying money for IF their content saves you time over gathering poorer information from many other sources. If the NYT can be one of the best sources of objective news, rather than sensationalist reporting, I think they&#039;ll do fine. There&#039;s too much pap out there. It looks like their frequent visitor system will allow them to prove their quality to the people who appreciate their stuff.

My personal approach is to provide both free and paid content. I provide free information/lessons on how to market your small business yourself, with an emphasis on the web. I also provide products that allow clients to pay me to do the work, if they don&#039;t want to take the time to learn the things I&#039;ve learned to allow me to do this effectively. I structure it so they can dump the more technical stuff on me, and do the more accessible parts themselves, if they wish.

The free content provides real value to visitors who may not have the money to buy my paid products, and genuinely helps them build their businesses. I believe the trust that builds will bring many of them back later, when they have more money than time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The currency of the web is attention, but here&#8217;s the kicker: your attention requires your time, and there&#8217;s a limited supply of that. Unless your time is worth nothing to you, at some point it&#8217;s &#8220;cheaper&#8221; to pay cash for what you need.</p>
<p>Therefore, the best sources of the information that solve your problems, the ones that aggregate and concentrate the answers you want, or those that best fit the niche you&#8217;re querying, will always be worth paying money for IF their content saves you time over gathering poorer information from many other sources. If the NYT can be one of the best sources of objective news, rather than sensationalist reporting, I think they&#8217;ll do fine. There&#8217;s too much pap out there. It looks like their frequent visitor system will allow them to prove their quality to the people who appreciate their stuff.</p>
<p>My personal approach is to provide both free and paid content. I provide free information/lessons on how to market your small business yourself, with an emphasis on the web. I also provide products that allow clients to pay me to do the work, if they don&#8217;t want to take the time to learn the things I&#8217;ve learned to allow me to do this effectively. I structure it so they can dump the more technical stuff on me, and do the more accessible parts themselves, if they wish.</p>
<p>The free content provides real value to visitors who may not have the money to buy my paid products, and genuinely helps them build their businesses. I believe the trust that builds will bring many of them back later, when they have more money than time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Farouk</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/someone-always-pays/#comment-12194</link>
		<dc:creator>Farouk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:44:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanfields.com/blog/?p=2864#comment-12194</guid>
		<description>great post:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>great post:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
