Categories
Analysis

The freedom to innovate has many enemies

One of the strongest arguments in favor of deregulating industries is the promotion of innovation. Industries that are gearing their strategies to the regulatory and antitrust environment, the argument goes, are unable to focus on serving their customers.

However, too-powerful corporations can stifle innovation in plenty of ways. The motion picture trust tried to keep independents from producing unauthorized movies. The independents moved to Los Angeles and became the establishment. If AT&T hadn’t been broken up, it’s unlikely that we would have the consumer Internet as we know it today. Currently, the access monopolies are trying to keep us from accessing standard network protocols (SMTP, FTP, etc.) in order to keep consumers in a walled garden.

Freedom to innovate is a constant theme of Microsoft’s lobbying against antitrust enforcement. Freedom for whom? Freedom for Microsoft, surely. But what about the millions of consumers and independent developers who want to modify their computers in ways that contradict Microsoft’s strategy? Who’s fighting for their freedom to innovate? Microsoft isn’t.

Intellectual property law is becoming a threat, rather than a spur, to innovation. SCO’s lawsuits agains the Linux community doesn’t promote innovation, nor does the RIAA’s desperate rear-guard action against file-sharing, or the proliferation of software patents, or the DMCA’s regulations agains reverse-engineering and information sharing. What’s ironic is that IP is government-created fiction that has nothing to do with liberty. It makes private property of ideas and enforces its rights with government force.

I don’t oppose the idea of intellectual property, but I do oppose the hypocrisy of demanding “freedom to innovate” while using government guns to limit your competitors’ freedom to innnovate.

Categories
Analysis

Why I don't understand libertarians

I’m convinced that reading Ayn Rand at too young an age causes brain damage. For a large part of my life I believed I could have been a libertarian, but my love of liberty made it impossible.

I don’t understand how you can simultaneously believe that the coercive power of democratic government is a potential force for evil that must be reigned in (which I do) and believe that the coercive power of big corporations is a force for good that must be unleashed.

I don’t understand how you simultaneously believe in that the chaos of the Internet is what makes it great (which I do) and believe that deregulating the access monopolies will improve the Internet.

I don’t understand how you can believe the Bill of Rights is the most important part of the Constitution (which I do) and turn our communications, personal information, schools, privacy, and bodies over to entities that are not bound by the first, fourth, or fifth amendments.

I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t believe that an essential function of government is to protect the weak from the strong.

Categories
Analysis

What is the purpose of repurposing?

After a week of listening to the NPR/Slate co-production “Day to Day“, I have to say that I don’t get it.

When I first heard the show, I thought, “What is this and why are they doing it?” When I heard the multiple credits to Slate salted throughout the show, things became more clear. NPR already does two or three hours of this kind of stuff, and “Day to Day” just seems forced.

When compared to the freshness of “This American Life”, “Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me”, or even “Talk of the Nation”, “Day to Day” reminds me of those clip shows the network magazines make for the airlines.

I suppose it’s a milestone of sorts, as the first online publication repurposed for radio. But if you believe you were put on this earth for a purpose, it’s probably wasn’t for repurposing.

It also makes me realize how far online publishing has to go. It’s still mostly repurposed print material. Individuals are already producing sites that are as exciting as “This American Life”, but with the possible exception of Salon, no one’s doing it on large scale.

Maybe it’s simply beyond the abilities of corporate media to produce anything that lively, intelligent or engaging. But I’d certainly like to see to big media companies use a little more imagination in their online products.

Categories
Research

The online ad boom could delay content charges

Right now, there is more money to be made selling ads online than selling news.

With online advertising continuing to climb (Emarketer says online ad spending will be up 4.8% in 2003), and with online newspapers getting an outsized share of that growth, who is going to be willing to jeopardize their seat on the gravy train by charging for content?

The Online Publishers’ Association says that their members (all big publishers) are seeing a 38% growth rate in online advertising. This is consistent with what the big newspaper publishers are reporting.

company Q2 revenue in millions Y/Y growth
NY Times $21.6 22%
Knight-Ridder $19.3 36%
Tribune n/a 15%
Lee Enterprises $5.8 35%

Categories
Research

More bad news for print classifieds

It’s no surprise to anyone that the Web now dominates the real estate advertising market.

In response to the question, ‘What resources did you use in your home-search process,’ 65 percent of respondents listed the Internet, while 49 percent mentioned newspapers. Two years ago, 43 percent of respondents listed newspapers as a primary information source while 43 percent listed the Internet as a primary source.”

For the true believers (like me), it’s a bit of a surprise that the Web was never able to disintermediate the real estate agents’ MLS monopoly. However, no one should be surprised that the agents recognized the Web as not only a cheaper, but a superior method to promote houses (and their services).

Not only did newspapers abuse their local classified monopoly for decades, but they never were able to offer an efficient buy in a business where the only thing that matters are location, location, and location. Why advertise to an entire metropolitan area when you only want buyers who are interested in a single neighborhood?

Bay Area real estate advertising never recovered from its decline in the recession of the early 90’s because the advertisers in their desperation found newer and cheaper ways to sell houses. The business was already pretty damaged by the time the Web came along.

Given the poor prognosis for newspaper classifieds in general and employment in particular, I was startled to hear that the Conference Board is still promoting its help-wanted index as a measure of the employment market, saying “Because ad volume has proven to be sensitive to labor market conditions, this measure provides an important gauge of change in the local, regional and national supply of jobs.”

What decade do the Conference Board’s economists live in? These days, employment classified ad volume is a lot more sensitive to online competition than it is to labor market conditions.