We live in an age when references to things are delivered, computed, to us automatically, near instantaneously, and with great precision. The computer has bolstered mankind's mental capacity and amplified powers of perception, through greater access to disparate sources of information, to a degree that is barely possible to calculate.
Search engines (pick your favorite one) are symbolic of this increased capability because the query for information is so basic to human existence. All animals devote a good portion of their energy processing images and associations. In this way computers have become extensions of thought and essential tools for discourse.
Nevertheless, capitalism is convincing someone that you own something, and the opportunity to seize these portals and proclaim oneself gatekeeper is too rich with possibilities to be wasted on organizations like Google. To not have image advertisements right on the home page is like the Super Bowl not advertising, aguably a crime against capitalism itself. The recent shakeup at Yahoo is promising however, and I do recall hearing something about Oracle--a company that has shown it can work with the establishment--acquiring Google.
Great reference Bargain Bin. Thank you.
Tim O'Reilly wrote a bit on that topic back in 2002 in an article titled "Piracy is Progressive Taxation, and Other Thoughts on the Evolution of Online Distribution." Granted it's dated by now, but here it is:
Lesson 1: Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy.
Let me start with book publishing. More than 100,000 books are published each year, with several million books in print, yet fewer than 10,000 of those new books have any significant sales, and only a hundred thousand or so of all the books in print are carried in even the largest stores. Most books have a few months on the shelves of the major chains, and then wait in the darkness of warehouses from which they will move only to the recycling bin. Authors think that getting a publisher will be the realization of their dreams, but for so many, it's just the start of a long disappointment.
Sites like Amazon that create a virtual storefront for all the books in print cast a ray of light into the gloom of those warehouses, and so books that would otherwise have no outlet at all can be discovered and bought. Authors who are fortunate enough to get the rights to their book back from the publisher often put them up freely online, in hopes of finding readers. The web has been a boon for readers, since it makes it easier to spread book recommendations and to purchase the books once you hear about them. But even then, few books survive their first year or two in print. Empty the warehouses and you couldn't give many of them away.
Many works linger in deserved obscurity, but so many more suffer simply from the vast differential between supply and demand.
I don't know the exact size of the entire CD catalog, but I imagine that it is similar in scope. Tens of thousands of musicians self-publish their own CDs; a happy few get a recording contract. Of those, fewer still have their records sell in appreciable numbers. The deep backlist of music publishers is lost to consumers because the music just isn't available in stores.
There are fewer films, to be sure, because of the cost of film making, but even there, obscurity is a constant enemy. Thousands of independent film makers are desperate for distribution. A few independent films, like Denmark's Dogme films, get visibility. But for most, visibility is limited to occasional showings at local film festivals. The rise of digital video also promises that film making will soon be as much a garage opportunity as starting a rock band, and as much of a garret opportunity as the great American novel.
Full article can be found here:
http://tim.oreilly.com/pub/a/p2p/2002/12/11/piracy.html
It just goes back to Darwin...survival of the fittest, and those willing to adapt and evolve.
Re: Not Black & White
Value Hiker
1/23/2012 10:25:26 PM
" It means you probably have a more level playing field now in terms of the opportunity to get noticed "
It is a very good point. The barrier of entry is lower these days compared to 20 years ago. Traditional Media companies have the narrow moat around them these days. The future belongs to the firm who provides the best contents, because distributing channel are less important due to the social media revolution.
Social Media to media industry has the same impact as Globalization to manufacturing industry. The world is becoming more and more flat.
I had an interesting conversation with a PR/marketing person today. We talked about the changing nature of the business, how social media is changing the way brands, ideas, and stories are moved around, and what's happened to traditional journalists.
One conclusion: If you don't know how to promote yourself in the social media/Internet world, you're in big trouble. Why is that? It seems that the traditional brands (Wall Street Journal, NYT, Economist, e.t.c.), though still powerful, are losing some measure of influence in Internet/social circles. This is both a challenge and an opportunity. If you work at the WSJ, it means you can work on their existing powerful social platforms, but it also means you probably have to work harder than ever to get noticed. If you are an upstart or somebody trying to beat the WSJ, it means you probably have a more level playing field now in terms of the opportunity to get noticed because the traditional outlets no longer control the distribution channel ... it's entirely open to anybody that wants to try to exploit it.
Well said, Scott. Without Google, some other company will do just the same.
"Like a thief in the night..." Google has taken what it wants and no one has said much about it, until now. LOL
My motto: Adapt or die!
Whining gets us nowhere -- as Fred points out.
Marvin you need to come out with all Guns blazing.
back2basicz
1/23/2012 9:04:36 AM
Marvin,
I am not going to argue for or against your position here.For I strongly believe that writers should be paid their fair share for the work they do.
But What I feel is that if you want to talk about your point and raise it in the strongest possible terms you need to come out with all Guns blazing and beat the daylights out of the opposition(which Google,Facebook,Wiki,etc have done so effectively this past week).They totally changed the terms of the debate in Congress and made sure that support for the bills falls and falls sharply.
You need to do something similar or you could pick up a leaf from Good Ol' New Gingrich here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yf_005EqDM
Regards
Ashish.
The blogs and comments posted on Investor Uprising do not reflect the views of Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, or its sponsors. Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, and its sponsors do not assume responsibility for any comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
|
 |
Latest Blogs
Telecom-equipment maker Ciena is a stock trader’s dream, as long as the timing is correct.
The FTC is offering a $50,000 cash prize to the person or group that can come up with a solution to those annoying robocalls.
Akamai is in the middle of four significant tech trends.
John Malone of Liberty Media will be taking over Sirius XM satellite radio when the existing CEO Mel Karmazin steps down. What's it mean?
Demand for students of the humanities exists, despite widespread aspersions on the discipline.
IU Education
Resources to help you become a better investor
Investor Uprising on Twitter
25 market-moving companies we're tracking
|
Tweet This