QOTD: Assuming the Costs of Piracy

Wonkbook is on the trail of some of the claims about the cost of piracy to the economy, but buried within the post is one of my favorite arguments. Brad Pulmer writes:

Part of the difficulty here is that it’s not always easy to tally up the true costs of piracy. For instance, if a person illegally downloads a movie or song that he never would’ve downloaded otherwise, then it’s not clear what the losses are (the benefits, by contrast, are much clearer).

That point of availability beyond the market, to me, is always fascinating. Just something I’m thinking about during this debate.


QOTD: Definitions

Courtesy of Wolfgang Blau’s Twitter feed:

“I am much less concerned about who we call a journalist than about what we call journalism” – @dangillmor


Social Media Leading to More First Amendment Love Among Teens?

That’s what Knight Foundation says:

Full infographic here, and don’t miss the rest of the details at KnightFoundation.org.


Facebook, the Phone Number Privacy Brouhaha and Birthday Wall Posts

Just as with the changing of the taps on Sam Adams seasonal flavors, every few months or so we can be guaranteed another “OMG, Facebook is invading my privacy because of [x].” This time around? The uproar is that the mobile app for Facebook conveniently grabs any phone number of your friends that they have made public and allows you to access it from within your phone. Of course, the ability to access this was blown grossly out of proportion: some people thought those numbers were completely published or saved by Facebook. They weren’t, but who doesn’t love a good cut-and-paste status message on what Facebook is doing to us?

(Let the record show that the m.facebook.com version has had this phone book option for as long as I can remember accessing it. In fact, I remember talking years ago that it was one of my favorite features of the mobile version of Facebook because the time I’m most likely to need and/or use the number that a friend made public on their profile is when I’m using a phone. Utility! I digress.)

Facebook responded with a status message response on Wednesday, and it was generally helpful to nerds like me who read Terms of Service (Termses of Service? Terms of Servii?). I don’t know if that generally explains it well enough. Basically, Facebook encourages you to add your phone number when syncing with one of the apps – and you have full rights to control who sees it based on your levels of privacy.

Talking about phone numbers is complicated, though. So I’m going to change course but write about something that works the exact same way from a privacy standpoint: your birthday. In fact, the settings are really similar (in terms of you limiting who can see it), it is completely required to register your account and actually is promoted even more publicly to your friends.

I don’t have the luxury of historic screen shots, but I hope my memory doesn’t fail me too well.

In 2004 at launch, just like any registration online, Facebook requested the birthday of its users to validate age. This was the profile-only era of Facebook, no walls and certainly no news feed. Birthdays were listed on the page and could be removed from the public eye by the viewer. In 2005, when the pages were first update to include the walls, birthday was still present, but without the news feed, there was no other landing page to gather birthday information (although somewhere in the back pages, you could find a list by day of your friends birthdays – not at all unlike the list of contacts that you can find related to phone number).

The biggest change was when birthday information went from being on the profile page to the landing page – thanks to the late 2006 introduction of the News Feed. Sure, the information was “below the fold” of the screen, but it was public enough that people started more regularly using the occasion to post on friends’ walls. Of course, by the next year, those wall postings too started making the news feed and thus was the birth of the Facebook Birthday phenom. Now? The information on your contacts’ birthdays is in one of the most prominent places on the home page, and it’s probably the way most of your contacts interact with you. (David Plotz’s hysterical “My Fake Facebook Birthdays” is a delightful overview of the banality of these types of posts, but that’s just a worthy tangent).

Do you remember any sort of uprising when Facebook moved the information about your birthday to this public of a place? Probably not. You were bombarded with greetings from friends and contacts. It was enjoyable – and there was a pretty good user reason why Facebook made the change to coincide with existing habits of its members. Now think of phone numbers of your friends and contacts: it is just as easy to hide your birthday from different friends as it your phone number.


The Online vs. Traditional Local News Dichotomy

“Communities now have more news distribution outlets and, simultaneously, less accountability journalism.”

-From the FCC study, “Information Needs of Communities.”

Or, as the WSJ explained in its coverage of the report: there is more and more people talking about news, but less local original content that is occurring.

My quick answer: the rise of more news outlets (notably, news sites and blogs) was driven by the change of technology that made publishing easy and cheap. What that didn’t lower the bar on was access. Sure, some established blogs get a seat at the press conference table, and more and more are on press release lists. That doesn’t do much.


The Reporting of Osama

Keith Urbahn, Chief of Staff of Donald Rumsfeld, got credit for “breaking” last night’s news before the President’s speech. This morning, he makes the much smarter point:

He couldn’t be more right.

More on this topic to come…


QOTD: Ditching Carbon Media

“But as I see it, if there’s an option to go digital, that’s my choice. With bandwidth and storage space being what they are, my infrastructure isn’t optimized for yesterday’s media delivery.”

~Louis Gray, on his decision to ditch carbon media any time he can.


When Even Comm Law Books Need Updating

The last Comm Law class I took just about five years ago was severely devoid of any content or case studies on how online journalism and media were impacting long held judicial tests. Like so many other heavily regulated industries, the libel, decency, fair use and journalistic protections have all needed a severe review – not exactly an easy cruise ship to turn into the iceberg.

Recently, it was drawn to my attention that the culture of online media is getting some attention, in the form of an interactive four-week course taught by George Freeman, vice president and assistant general counsel at The New York TimesNow. I’m not sure if the class is going to cover how Downfall parodies impact fair use, but at least it’s a pretty good profile start.

Journalism Law for Bloggers” will run from April 26 to May 23, 2011, and registration is available through NY Times Know Now. From the release:

“This Program of Study course is part of the New York Times Knowledge Network, which is open to consumers nationwide. Programs of Study courses, developed and taught by New York Times journalists or professional staff, cover a variety of topics and are delivered online. Students can select any number of these courses: to stand alone, or be taken as a sequence.”

Sounds like fun – especially if you’re not interested in lugging around one of those giant blue comm law books.


New York Times [Subscribe!] Paywall [Subscribe!] Coming March 28

The day we knew was coming, and the Times has announced its paywall model. The rumor of “meters” was the big discussion point, but apparently that means 20 articles each month for free before subscribing is necessary.

I know point back to my three favorite pieces on this topic. The two part “Don’t Build the Wall” (part 1, part 2), and my all time favorite, “Is News Too Cheap to Meter?

The copy of the e-mail sent to subscribers. I have highlighted the number of times it mentions that subscribers to the print version get it for free.

Dear New York Times Reader,

Today marks a significant transition for The New York Times as we introduce digital subscriptions. It’s an important step that we hope you will see as an investment in The Times, one that will strengthen our ability to provide high-quality journalism to readers around the world and on any platform. The change will primarily affect those who are heavy consumers of the content on our Web site and on mobile applications.

This change comes in two stages. Today, we are rolling out digital subscriptions to our readers in Canada, which will enable us to fine-tune the customer experience before our global launch. On March 28, we will begin offering digital subscriptions in the U.S. and the rest of the world.

If you are a home delivery subscriber of The New York Times, you will continue to have full and free access to our news, information, opinion and the rest of our rich offerings on your computer, smartphone and tablet. International Herald Tribune subscribers will also receive free access to NYTimes.com.

If you are not a home delivery subscriber, you will have free access up to a defined reading limit. If you exceed that limit, you will be asked to become a digital subscriber.

This is how it will work, and what it means for you:

  • On NYTimes.com, you can view 20 articles each month at no charge (including slide shows, videos and other features). After 20 articles, we will ask you to become a digital subscriber, with full access to our site.
  • On our smartphone and tablet apps, the Top News section will remain free of charge. For access to all other sections within the apps, we will ask you to become a digital subscriber.
  • The Times is offering three digital subscription packages that allow you to choose from a variety of devices (computer, smartphone, tablet). More information about these plans is available at nytimes.com/access.
  • Again, all New York Times home delivery subscribers will receive free access to NYTimes.com and to all content on our apps. If you are a home delivery subscriber, go to homedelivery.nytimes.com to sign up for free access.
  • Readers who come to Times articles through links from search, blogs and social media like Facebook and Twitter will be able to read those articles, even if they have reached their monthly reading limit. For some search engines, users will have a daily limit of free links to Times articles.
  • The home page at NYTimes.com and all section fronts will remain free to browse for all users at all times.

For more information, go to nytimes.com/digitalfaq.

Thank you for reading The New York Times, in all its forms.

Sincerely,

Arthur Sulzberger Jr.

Publisher, The New York Times

Chairman, The New York Times Company

I’m going to test a way around this: tweet the article you want to see yourself. That should be the loophole per this bullet:

  • Readers who come to Times articles through links from search, blogs and social media like Facebook and Twitter will be able to read those articles, even if they have reached their monthly reading limit.

Some Sweet, Sweet Paywall Love (…Jokes)

Courtesy of 10,000 Words, via SoupSoup


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.