<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Y Combinator&#8217;s Request for Startups: The future of content and journalism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jinalshah.com/2009/08/17/y-combinators-request-for-startups-the-future-of-content-and-journalism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jinalshah.com/2009/08/17/y-combinators-request-for-startups-the-future-of-content-and-journalism/</link>
	<description>Socialization of the Web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 21:43:37 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ruben Sun</title>
		<link>http://jinalshah.com/2009/08/17/y-combinators-request-for-startups-the-future-of-content-and-journalism/comment-page-1/#comment-4739</link>
		<dc:creator>Ruben Sun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 18:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jinalshah.com/?p=682#comment-4739</guid>
		<description>At first blush, my instinct is to repeat that &quot;1984&quot; adage popularized by Chris Anderson &quot;Information wants to be free. Information also wants to be expensive ... That tension will not go away.&quot;

Perhaps it is possible for micro-niche (longtail) auteurs to charge for content. Yet, to promote their content even they will engage in &quot;freemium&quot; practices (eg. Radiohead&#039;s In Rainbows).

Here&#039;s the trick... information wants to be free, but contextualizing it and extending its use is still something people are willing to pay for. So for example: Kindle... you&#039;re not paying for the content. You&#039;re paying for the convenience. Maybe this is very PSFKy of me to say, but I believe the future of content will remain as the hook (does this read marketing? maybe.) The product will be the service and the utility that you can extend from the content.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At first blush, my instinct is to repeat that &#8220;1984&#8243; adage popularized by Chris Anderson &#8220;Information wants to be free. Information also wants to be expensive &#8230; That tension will not go away.&#8221;</p>
<p>Perhaps it is possible for micro-niche (longtail) auteurs to charge for content. Yet, to promote their content even they will engage in &#8220;freemium&#8221; practices (eg. Radiohead&#8217;s In Rainbows).</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the trick&#8230; information wants to be free, but contextualizing it and extending its use is still something people are willing to pay for. So for example: Kindle&#8230; you&#8217;re not paying for the content. You&#8217;re paying for the convenience. Maybe this is very PSFKy of me to say, but I believe the future of content will remain as the hook (does this read marketing? maybe.) The product will be the service and the utility that you can extend from the content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dominic</title>
		<link>http://jinalshah.com/2009/08/17/y-combinators-request-for-startups-the-future-of-content-and-journalism/comment-page-1/#comment-4736</link>
		<dc:creator>Dominic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:34:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jinalshah.com/?p=682#comment-4736</guid>
		<description>Interesting post - you raise a number of interesting questions about the future of content. I like the one quote &quot;people will pay for content and service when they perceive value...&quot; Reminds me of the financial markets and how people are willing to pay outrageous sums of money for investment newsletters that purport to give them an &quot;informational edge&quot; over other investors. Quite simply, people are willing to pay money because it helps them make money. With that in mind, I&#039;d look for other industries where it is also important to have an &quot;informational edge&quot; and then charge a premium to those readers who want access to that information. Just my $0.02.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting post &#8211; you raise a number of interesting questions about the future of content. I like the one quote &#8220;people will pay for content and service when they perceive value&#8230;&#8221; Reminds me of the financial markets and how people are willing to pay outrageous sums of money for investment newsletters that purport to give them an &#8220;informational edge&#8221; over other investors. Quite simply, people are willing to pay money because it helps them make money. With that in mind, I&#8217;d look for other industries where it is also important to have an &#8220;informational edge&#8221; and then charge a premium to those readers who want access to that information. Just my $0.02.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
