<?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: The Future of Print: Is Print Dead?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/</link>
	<description>generation y is at your service. sort of.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 06:33:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/comment-page-1/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 18:39:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/#comment-50</guid>
		<description>John: Thanks for the comment! Pressmart looks interesting.

Holly: Really interesting comment. I think I&#039;m only a couple of years younger than you (1983) and yet I have no issue with paying for online content. Perhaps it&#039;s just a cultural thing. I am probably WAY geekier than you are. It&#039;s a claim to fame.

Monetization is definitely harder with web media, but I don&#039;t think it&#039;s impossible. Has the right balance been struck yet? Not particularly. But I think a lot of that is because the portable technology isn&#039;t there yet. Just as digital music wasn&#039;t something people really wanted to pay for until the iPod (and subsequent mp3 players), we have yet to see the killer device for reading on the go. Do I want to spend $20 a month to view a newspaper&#039;s content on my computer? Not a chance. Would I, thought, to have it beamed through the air and automatically downloaded to my handheld gadget? It&#039;s very likely that I would.

I actually used to work in newspapers too (on the editorial side) -- my limited observation was that it didn&#039;t seem like ANYONE was making very much money.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John: Thanks for the comment! Pressmart looks interesting.</p>
<p>Holly: Really interesting comment. I think I&#8217;m only a couple of years younger than you (1983) and yet I have no issue with paying for online content. Perhaps it&#8217;s just a cultural thing. I am probably WAY geekier than you are. It&#8217;s a claim to fame.</p>
<p>Monetization is definitely harder with web media, but I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s impossible. Has the right balance been struck yet? Not particularly. But I think a lot of that is because the portable technology isn&#8217;t there yet. Just as digital music wasn&#8217;t something people really wanted to pay for until the iPod (and subsequent mp3 players), we have yet to see the killer device for reading on the go. Do I want to spend $20 a month to view a newspaper&#8217;s content on my computer? Not a chance. Would I, thought, to have it beamed through the air and automatically downloaded to my handheld gadget? It&#8217;s very likely that I would.</p>
<p>I actually used to work in newspapers too (on the editorial side) &#8212; my limited observation was that it didn&#8217;t seem like ANYONE was making very much money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/comment-page-1/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:50:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/#comment-48</guid>
		<description>I totally agree with you that online publishing is booming now. Circulations over the internet made huge difference in the publishing industry. I do the frequent research on publishing trends and I observed that most of the people intended to web editions. As a result all of the major publishers are already adopted the new technology and some other publishers are using the services of www.pressmart.net for digitization services for print publications.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally agree with you that online publishing is booming now. Circulations over the internet made huge difference in the publishing industry. I do the frequent research on publishing trends and I observed that most of the people intended to web editions. As a result all of the major publishers are already adopted the new technology and some other publishers are using the services of <a href="http://www.pressmart.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.pressmart.net</a> for digitization services for print publications.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: holly hoffman</title>
		<link>http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/comment-page-1/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>holly hoffman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:00:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yworking.com/culture/the-future-of-print-is-print-dead/#comment-47</guid>
		<description>If I didn&#039;t work in the newspaper industry and know what I know because of it, I would totally agree with you. But because I am on this side, I know what the real issue is. It&#039;s not content; it&#039;s how you monetize content.

Print is easy to monetize; we know how to do it already - print ads plus an initial fee (purchase price). The problem with &quot;technology&quot; is that it&#039;s more difficult to monetize. You can use ads with most media, like websites, but we&#039;re still struggling to find revenue models for things like video and mobile content. Increasingly, people are not willing to pay the &quot;initial fee&quot; part of this - where you paid for a CD, you don&#039;t want to pay for a digital download of a song. Where you paid for a newspaper, you don&#039;t want to pay for access to a news site. That&#039;s a big chunk of revenue to be made up.

That&#039;s the real challenge to any of the paper-based media - finding a way to monetize the web and mobile versions in a generation of people who feel entitled to free content. 

For my part, I am a product of my generation, and refuse to pay for anything online, save for a few programs that I can&#039;t seem to find pirated versions of. The last vestige will be books, in my mind. I can&#039;t see myself reading a Kindle. Although, it does seem awfully convenient... how easy the young are swayed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I didn&#8217;t work in the newspaper industry and know what I know because of it, I would totally agree with you. But because I am on this side, I know what the real issue is. It&#8217;s not content; it&#8217;s how you monetize content.</p>
<p>Print is easy to monetize; we know how to do it already &#8211; print ads plus an initial fee (purchase price). The problem with &#8220;technology&#8221; is that it&#8217;s more difficult to monetize. You can use ads with most media, like websites, but we&#8217;re still struggling to find revenue models for things like video and mobile content. Increasingly, people are not willing to pay the &#8220;initial fee&#8221; part of this &#8211; where you paid for a CD, you don&#8217;t want to pay for a digital download of a song. Where you paid for a newspaper, you don&#8217;t want to pay for access to a news site. That&#8217;s a big chunk of revenue to be made up.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the real challenge to any of the paper-based media &#8211; finding a way to monetize the web and mobile versions in a generation of people who feel entitled to free content. </p>
<p>For my part, I am a product of my generation, and refuse to pay for anything online, save for a few programs that I can&#8217;t seem to find pirated versions of. The last vestige will be books, in my mind. I can&#8217;t see myself reading a Kindle. Although, it does seem awfully convenient&#8230; how easy the young are swayed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

