The author reads pg's statement that "People will pay for information they think they can make money from." and hears the negative - people /won't/ pay for information they /can't/ make money from. That setup is then used to conclude: Buy (other people's) stuff via my Amazon Affiliate link. Feh.
People will pay for content, they just don't know it. But really, what people is that? The people reading the content, or people reaching out to content readers. The current foregone conclusion is the latter, and everything-ad supported is proof of that. The same people paying for AND reading the content being one in the same is the exception. Consumer Reports, Wall Street Journal and PBS are the only three that immediately come to mind. Even ESPN, one of the larger old-and-new media platforms, last I heard few are paying them directly, most are through third parties a la cable provider Comcast.
People will pay for content, they just don't know it. But really, what people is that? The people reading the content, or people reaching out to content readers. The current foregone conclusion is the latter, and everything-ad supported is proof of that. The same people paying for AND reading the content being one in the same is the exception. Consumer Reports, Wall Street Journal and PBS are the only three that immediately come to mind. Even ESPN, one of the larger old-and-new media platforms, last I heard few are paying them directly, most are through third parties a la cable provider Comcast.