As a few of you have sent in, it looks like Scott Adams isn't a huge fan of paywalls, and has expressed that with his latest Dilbert strip:
It's a nice way to put things succinctly: setting up a paywall equals destroying revenue... I think this is actually a point that gets ignored by many defenders of the paywall. They think that any revenue earned from a paywall is incremental, as if implementing (and then managing) a paywall doesn't have tremendous costs. The maintenance side is one thing, but the real cost is opportunity cost in ceding the future to other publications.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Washington Post Charges An 'Activation' Fee To Let You Pay Them To Get Around Their Paywall
- GQ And Forbes Go After Ad Blocker Users Rather Than Their Own Shitty Advertising Inventory
- Canadian Judge Says Asking For A Copy Of A Legally-Obtained But Paywalled Article Is Circumvention
- Don't Think Open Access Is Important? It Might Have Prevented Much Of The Ebola Outbreak
- DailyDirt: Peer Reviewed Publications Are Everywhere