Reporters? Customers? Is There A Difference?
from the who-gets-more-value dept
When you’re dealing with information, it isn’t always clear who should be paying for what. There is often a question of who is getting more value. Is the information valuable by itself, or is it promotional? I remember this question coming up early on during the “boom” years, when places like AOL realized that there was no need for them to pay for certain content. Those content providers should, instead be paying them for the privilege (and publicity) of being included in AOL’s system. It appears that FoxSports may be noticing a similar “shift” in values. There’s a debate going on at Romenesko’s site (found via Dan Gillmor) about the fact that FoxSports.com is getting fans to pay them to be columnists for certain sporting events. In fact, they’re
Comments on “Reporters? Customers? Is There A Difference?”
No Subject Given
One could say the same for sites like this. I think it’s silly to charge for this kind of thing, but if the market will bear it… why not?
Re: No Subject Given
Just curious, what exactly could people say the same about sites like this?
I’ve never charged anyone to write for Techdirt…
I’m assuming I misunderstood your comment?
Maybe the phrase “sports journalism” is an oxymoron.