This comment by a user of Metafilter commenting on commercially-led changes to Digg made me stop and think in its directness. It’s a great insight and updates “there’s no such thing as a free lunch” for the data era.
If you are not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product being sold
People don’t like ads interrupting their viewing, and adverts that aren’t relevant to particular viewers (or skipped) don’t work.
Step forward MirriAd – a neat way of allowing product placement to be inserted post production. Its effectiveness will all be down to execution, but it’s a very neat idea. Imagine being able to place ads into programmes tactically at a minute’s notice, or show ads for products a particular viewer has been researching online.
Check out the video demo.
I wrote a piece back in May saying that people would pay for content if it was made easy.
The Guardian have just launched their iPhone app – priced at £2.39. On first use it looks very slick and well thought through.
There’ll be plenty of people looking to see how this does, but to me it it feels like a far smarter option than paywalls.
The web is awash with reaction to Rupert Murdoch’s plans to charge for newspaper content online. Is he a rare voice of reason or does he just not get it?
I think people will pay for digital content – if it’s easy enough.
The problem with handing over £0.99 to read a newspaper online is not the price – it’s just too much hassle. You have to fill in your details, confirm your email address, enter your credit cards etc. Urgh. Simple micropayments have never been cracked on the web.
Apple have shown the way forward. No-one was buying digital music till they made it easy. No-one bought mobile apps till it became a breeze to do so. The sweet integration of device (iPhone), content (apps, music, tv) and store (iTunes) removes all the barriers. They’ve made it almost fun to spend.
When paying for good content on the web is this easy, people will do it.
btw, would anyone have bought iFart on the web using a credit card?