Would You Pay for it?

You are reading an article on the internet that for some reason is just a bit more intriguing than all the others you've read that day. At the bottom of the article, you find a button to click and pay ten cents to support the author. If it really were as easy as clicking that button, would you do it? Companies are beginning to emerge under the assumption that internet users want some way of giving back to the authors of the content they already use. Flattr is one of those companies. Started in 2010, it already boasts a user base of 70,000, and wants 1,000,000 by the end of the year. A goal this high seems to be quite lofty considering that the two companies using the model that came before have struggled to stay afloat (One of which has listed that the company is for sale on the home page). Flattr has a slightly different model than its predecessors in that it asks for a flat rate every month from its users and distributes money evenly between clicks, but will this be enough to differentiate itself? Most likely not, but only time will tell if users find the concept appealing enough to subscribe.

A Bit More Competition for Google

As Google has grown to be the absolute dominant force in search engines, it has come under the light of scrutiny concerning just about every aspect of its business. Other companies have begun emerging to compete with Google including Bing and a brand new search engine, called DuckDuckGo. Recently, DuckDuckGo has been pushing its business model by subtly criticizing Google's gathering of information from its users. It seems to be working too, as DuckDuckGo can now claim 160,000 queries every day. This may seem like a virtually insignificant number, but by pushing its model of not gathering user information, it is showing Google and the other large search engines that there are those who prefer imperfect search algorithms over having their information gathered. As more and more smaller companies begin to appear and pull on Google's share of the search engine market, Google will have to admit its own flaws and begin changing some of its policies or it will keep losing small portions of its share to these smaller companies.

When News Ceases to be New(s)

What is it exactly that gives news its appeal? That leads us to have an interest and a desire to know? In an article by John Gehl and Suzanne Douglas, they state that "News is surprise", and go on to state that there is a steady decline in this "surprise" as the world becomes more and more connected through all the mediums of communication. Could the fact that the world is so connected today though, lead to the decline of major news outlets? The surprise is gone, surely without that element of surprise, they will inevitably disappear or at least shrink in size. I can safely say that I never get all of my news in a day solely from major media outlets. Instead, I hear about something happening from an acquaintance. Or, I might see mention of some major happening on facebook, which ultimately leads me to read about that happening on cnn or foxnews, or some other site. Where 100 years ago newspapers were the first source for people to learn about an event, now these sources have adapted the model of reporting the news rather than simply telling the news. Because they are not what they used to be, they have adapted to a changing, connected world and will not be going anywhere anytime soon.