Hey WSJ, go fuck yourself.
Call me when WSJ decides to adopt a new business model.
Subscriptions on the internet is not a new business model.
Their "new business model" is quite successful and the envy of the industry.
However, it seems like the paywall only works because it's so leaky in the first place.
I'd imagine before the internet, you may have sneaked a peak at a friend's issue of the WSJ or read one at a coffee shop. I suppose the leaky paywall is the modern equivalent.
Almost none of the money that online distributors pull in (music, video, content vendors) makes it back to the actual content producers. So I can't say I'm sad to see this particular iteration of the industry crashing and burning.
You're awfully presumptuous for someone who can't spell "college" correctly.
The problem is there is still a giant gap between what makers and sellers earn. It is no longer the case that distribution costs are prohibitive, makers no longer need massive upfront investment to sell things. So why is it acceptable to you for such exploitation to continue?
Your argument that "Almost none of the money that online distributors pull in (music, video, content vendors) makes it back to the actual content producers." is complete nonsense. It's no excuse to want everything for free or hate paid content. You really are a young entitled college student that wants everything for free. We all were. I was. Money was tight and went towards noodles and living expenses and we pirated everything because we couldn't afford it. Life changed, we grew up, graduated, got jobs, appreciate an income and now pay for things. One day when you bust your ass making something you'll appreciate someone paying you for it.
And further, even if I were a broke college kid that wouldn't itself invalidate my actual argument. It's a fallacy to discredit a point because of the social status of the point-maker.
Reading through your blog, I understand why you're so invested in the irrational position you hold.
Good luck with turning things around.