Category: Blogging

Money For Nothing And The Blogs For Free

Bill Quick has become one of the first bloggers to switch over to a subscription-content model for his blog. He’s using a service called BloggingNetwork that charges $3/month to offer access to certain items along with the ability to comment on them.

As much as I’d like a system like that to work, it’s going to fall flat on its ass by the end of the year.

The reason why is simple: opinions are like assholes, everyone’s got one. Granted, some opinions are more valuable than others, and Daily Pundit is a good site, but there are a lot of sites that offer the same basic content for free. Basically, the Blogging Network assumes that people are going to pay for someone’s unfiltered, unedited opinion, and accept the restrictions that go along with it. What if I quote at length from a premium article? Would that be tantamount to blogging piracy? What if I want to link to the article? This opens up a whole big can of worms.

Paying for content isn’t the issue – I pay $40 a year for National Review OnDeadTree (a bill that I just recieved about a billion collection notices for, and that I really need to pay ASAP…) because I know there’s going to be good content there. I’ll also leave a few bucks into the tipjars of my favorite bloggers from time to time if I have some extra cash to throw around. I figure a good Lileks rant or a InstaPundit’s prolific linking is worth a buck or two from now and then.

The question is, is paying in advance for someone’s unfiltered, unedited opinion a good business model? Not a chance. Even if the content is there, the fact that it’s behind some firewall where my readers can’t get to it means that I can’t link it, and if I can’t link it, it’s just too damn much of a hastle.

Is there a content model that would work? Absolutely. Personally, a Blogging Monthly magazine would be a better alternative. A service like that could have the best in the blogging business submit one premium article per month that would then be added to the site. There would have to be an editing process to help keep the quality worth paying for. I would gladly pay $3 a month or even a little more for a site that searches the web for me, finds the blogs I wouldn’t have found on my own, and gives those writers a chance to put their best content out there. Granted, the linking issue would still be there, but if the content were good enough, there would likely be enough of a core audience that I wouldn’t feel bad about linking through a pay site. It would also ensure that the kind of unfiltered and unedited content that can often be the blogosphere’s biggest strength remains free.

As for the Blogging Network, I would be expecting this one to be in the dot com deadpool in short order. Then again, if it does take off I’ll eat my words – and I’ll do it for free.

Pseudonymous Bloggers In The Crosshairs

Steven Den Beste has a scathing piece criticizing Demosthenes for blogging anonymously. Usually, Den Beste is one of the best bloggers and a very astute individual, but there’s something about this attack that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. In fact, there are a number of ad hominem attacks in the piece that warrants some rebuttle.

Den Beste’s criticism of Demosthenes hinges upon the notion that since he’s anonymous, he can’t be an effective advocate for his positions. (I’m assuming Demosthenes is male for the sake of argument here.):

By refusing to reveal his identity he indicates that he’s not actually as committed to what he says as he pretends to be, and more importantly that he is not as committed as he wants others to be. He is attempting to convince others to do what he himself isn’t willing to, and this kind of hypocrisy has always reduced the persuasiveness of any messenger. He is reduced to delivering his message only to those who already agree, because most who are undecided will discount him. (Which probably helps explain his low traffic levels.)

First of all, we have to consider that some people simply don’t want their personal information out on the Internet for everyone to see. The fact that someone can fairly effectively hide their identity on the Internet isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Nor does anonymity mean that one’s argument should just be brushed aside. The Federalist Papers were orginally published anonymously, and they’re among some of the best political documents ever written. The fact that they were published anonymously be people with active interests in their adoption does not tarnish that reputation. Nor does Demosthenes deciding to keep his identity secret necessarily mean that his ideas are any less worthy of consideration. Nor does it mean that he’s a hypocrite, for all we know he could be just as active in his offline life as he is online. Granted, there’s no way to know, but simply dismissing the argument doesn’t seem to be appropriate.

Nor does the charge of having little readership stick. Demosthenes’ web statistics are available for public examination, and they show an average of 4,121 unique vistors per month. Granted, by USS Clueless standards that’s not much, but that isn’t necessarily too shabby either. (My traffic is significantly less than that, and I’m pretty happy with my levels of readership for a relatively new player in a crowded field.)

Granted, I chose to blog under my real name, but there are times when I wonder if that was a smart choice. If I were to apply for a job with the State Department, I’m not sure my vocal criticism of that agency would be something I want under my name. Others might not want to take that kind of personal liability, and they’ve every right to do so. Just because they exercise that right doesn’t mean that their arguments are instantly less valid. I linked to Demosthenes because he’s a good writer who does a good job of challenging the prevailing wisdom of the blogosphere, even if I don’t always agree with his positions. The content of his arguments should be the criteria by which his blog is judged, not the name he uses.

UPDATE: Jane Galt, who is also a (semi)pseudonymous blogger has another very
well put response to Den Beste’s criticisms. I’ll agree that anonymous bloggers do lose some amount of credibility, but good writing and thoughtful argument can easily make up for that.

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: Lawrence Simon also
tackles the issue with his usual snarky common sense.