Free isn't Free

The news business has produced an excellent example of a basic economics principle: There is no such thing as a free lunch. As the interenet boomed, there was an idea that online ads would be able to pay for everything. The dot-com bust and the struggles since then have shown this is not true. The problem is that people don't like advertsements. Those who know a few basics about the computer download firefox and adblocker. IE8 has an add-on to block ads as well. So a good portion of people never see the ads. And there's the fact that no newspaper or magazine, no matter how big, was able to give away its print version for free and profit from the ads. It is a model that seemed possible, but has been proven ineffective. So they need to and will start charging. Those magazines and newspapers that begin charging for their online content will survive. Those that don't, won't.

The fact is, free content is usually low-quality content. And any high-quality free content is not sustainable. It costs money to produce high-quality content. To pay the reporters, writers, editors, and website designers the newspapers will need money. TO get money, since the ad idea is not functional, that will need to charge money. It's not a complicated idea. As the article mentions, the Economist has been very succesful while charging money. The Wall Street Journal has been just as successful. While newspapers and magazines are declining left-and-right, these two publications are thriving on a model many people denounce. The simple fact is, people are willing to pay for quality. Money is a signal of value. If it costs more, there's a good chance it's higher quality. That is a price I am willing to pay.

Save the Auto Industry

Here is a great op-ed column on the auto industry, or rather, the administrations plans on the op-ed industry. Not too comforting. But perhaps it will be a good thing. If the UAW has a large stake in Chrysler and GM, it will be in their best interest for the companies to run well. So the question is, will they use their new-found powr to bully the companies into giving them higher pay and greater benefits, or will they now have the incentive to only ask for that which will benefit the company as a whole? We'll see what happens.