The more you hide your content, the less relevant it becomes.
Rick Klau blogged today about an article he wrote (about Google) on 01/06/99 when he and I (as part of RedStreet) were writing for LegalResearcher.com (an offshoot of Law Journal Extra!). I saved a copy of his email (containing the article) but the article itself is long gone. You can find a link to Rick’s article on Archive.org, but the article itself is 404. Why? Because the publisher believed that the way to make money from the web was to get users to pay for content. You know, like print publications. Of course, print publications make some money from subscriptions, but print publications make a lot more money from advertising.
But publishers, you see, like to think that they are in the publishing business. They are not. They are in the advertising business. More correctly, the print publications who are sill in business realize that they are in the advertising business.
So the better model (so far) has been to publish content for free (good content), get lots of traffic (good traffic), and sell advertising (good advertising).
In September 2007, The New York Times freed 20 years of archives, ending its failed pay-to-read TimesSelect service. As a result, The New York Times will likely continue to be a viable (online and possibly print) publication for at least the next few years.
In contrast, LegalResearcher.com folded and has become a footnote in Internet history.
Other legal publishers, most notably the American Bar Association (ABA), cling to outdated publishing models that others have abandoned. When will the ABA see the light? Will the ABA ever free its content to increase its (both the ABA’s and the content’s) relevance? Or will it cling to old paper-based publishing models in the hopes that it will solve a puzzle that The New York Times failed to solve?
Free your content. Sell ads. Get over it.
P.S. This is not a new idea: that (software, print, web, music, and blog) publishers need to be more clued about the Internet. Here are some other articles (dating back to 1996) where I mention this theme.
- Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Gives Up On Blogging, Switches To Partial Feed
Dilbert Blog gets the Freakonomics treatment, becomes a footnote in blogging history.
- Illegal Feeds And Betting Against The Internet
The clue train has left the station, and most publishers aren’t on board.
In which Erik Heels demonstrates that domain names – not diamonds – are forever.
- Uncool: USPTO Breaks Millions Of Patent URLs Without Public Notice
Static URLs? We don’t need no stinkin’ static URLs!
- Death To Partial Feeds
It doesn’t matter where your content is read!
- Steal This Article: Epilogue
A technology evangelist’s work is never done.
- Are Magazines Dead?
If magazines are not dead but dying, can they be saved?
- Steal This Article: It May Be My Last
Organizations large and small – including the ABA – need to evolve on the ever-changing Internet.
- It’s The Metadata, Stupid
For the music that I have purchased, I want all of the metadata: the MP3s, the album art, the BPM data, the liner notes, the lyrics, the tablatures, the recording dates, the release dates, the artist’s history, etc. Today, I can’t get all of the metadata from a single source.
- The Dark (Gray) Age Of Music On The Internet
While there are a lot of choices for consumers, the current state of music on the Internet leaves a lot to be desired.
- Musician Loses Job Due To File Sharing
- The ‘Duh’ Of Shrinkwrap Licenses
Kids have figured out the problem with shrinkwrap licenses. So why can’t judges?
- Are You Eating Your Coffee Beans?
Smart companies are ‘giving away’ portions of their content online without hurting sales of their other products.
- Business Is A Conversation (Or Clueful Lawyers)
The business of law is a conversation. Are you conversing?
- Death On The Internet (Or What Would Orwell Do?)
What happens to a site after its operator is deceased? When a corporate personality dies, should the person’s profile page be deleted from the company site?
- Ease-of-Copying In The Digital Age – Turning A Negative Into A Positive
Rather than worrying about ease-of-copying, owners of copyrighted works should use it to their advantage.