tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062506512917817626.post9216783473331495543..comments2009-12-01T19:26:14.261-08:00John A. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01192570573329656945noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2062506512917817626.post-4547286302966191262009-12-01T15:24:44.535-08:002009-12-01T15:24:44.535-08:00I totally agree with you on all points.<br /><br />One thing I am always focusing about, when talking about journalism and content is, that certain content has a different value from consumer A to consumer B etcetera. I appreicate the value of The Economist, but of TechCrunch and RWW too. Both are verticals, but only one has a (semi)paywall I pay for. Because nowhere do I find the breath and value. Where TC and RWW, Mashable, &amp; Co are digital abundant and don&#39;t have an office in China. So the economic are totally different. We have to make a case-by-case decision. Is it a special vertical, niche? Or is it abundant?<br /><br />On the other hand, the electrician, who has no general interest, still needs in the future some sort of free information to make sound economic decisions.<br /><br />Third, who says news have a copyright? Who owns the right for &#39;Tiger Woods breaking news&#39;?<br /><br />Will leave it there, wish you all the best for your new venture. I even posted a short note on my blog.<br /><br />-- MJmichaeljunghttp://michaeljung.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com