Bite the Hand
If You Happen to be in Billings, Montana Tonight

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Do-da

The big picture?

http://www.cringely.com/2009/05/the-future-of-internet-tv-in-america/

Kenneth Jarecke

Yeah, I agree.

I think we're about three or four months away from Apple announcing their 10 inch touchscreen e-reader, which will basically be the magazine version of the newspaper-like Kindle.

I also see Goggle getting hit with an anti-trust suit, of some sort in the next year or so.

Just my opinion.


Barney Rubble

Naw, it's bigger than that. Read the article again and think of the model that's being presented. It certainly is taking Apple sometime to piece together their grand plan but presents a compelling case for their understanding of the variety of content and audiences and how to best commoditize that into a profit. Just as with Apple's grand plan it could be done in photojournalism, but would take sometime.

My way of thinking of this is, wire services/Getty are the TV shows on Hulu (massive immediately available archived or original content), other's work if conceived and distributed correctly could be just like the movies on Apple TV (exclusive, original, robust, pointed/focused, experimental/risk taking). Subscription vs. pay as you go (a la carte).

One thing for sure that is needed to pull off the survival of the industry is a collective conscience with clear objectives. Obviously, there will always be those out to just get published who will undercut everyone else. And in the digital Internet-age this has not only happened but, has hastened the demise of many individuals' livelihood. It doesn't have to be so, if a group (even small) said, "...we know we produce a superior product and we won't sell unless these are the terms xxx.", things would change. If the traditional and current outlets didn't like the terms, they'd be free to hire and use work from those who would work for less. The natural reaction, especially now in the Internet-age would be to publish the work yourself (selves). In a sense cutting out the middleman (publishers) all together. Those kinds of market forces could easily be ignored until someone noticed and saw a way to make money, which probably wouldn't be all that long given the players and their work that was involved. Remember the Internet and the digital age are not only leveraging change on this photojournalism industry but also on the publishing and communication industries as well. It's the wild west all over again. All you have to do is stake your claim and defend it.

Now again, look at Apple and what Steve Jobs have done with the Apple brand and basically "said" to the PC industry. "We're not about building crap, just quality." An example of this is, a friend of mine subscribes to DWELL magazine over Home & Garden why? Because she likes the "style" of the magazine, she likes the paper it's printed on, the articles are more pointed to her personal tastes etc. People drive BMWs over Toyotas or Chevrolets why? Because a BMW is a BMW not a Chevrolet. If that's viewed as snobbery that's only one view. For those BMW consumers the meanings might include snobbery but also a host of other reasons.

Doing the best possible work, being a craftsman and expecting to be paid as such is also a personal choice and there is a market for that choice. Maybe it is smaller, maybe it is currently more limited, but Apple seems to be doing fine with both wise investments, money management, and savvy marketing strategies thinking this way. It's time for a good many people in this field to ban together and to think much longer term about themselves and their work. Only then will things change.

I keep thinking of how things were for Cartier-Bresson and those of his generation. They just did what they did best scrapping by any way they could (fashion work comes to mind first) and then along one day came LIFE and they started to be published and that's when people noticed what they had to offer. That's when people began to pay for what they were. All of this happened with newspapers being published in nearly every city/town, with wire services being present etc. I really don't see what's changed all that much. Immediacy? Style? The number of publishing outlets, too many, too little?

The comments to this entry are closed.