Pew study hints at what Web users will pay for

December 30, 2010

(AP) -- The Web may seem like the land of something for nothing. Free video. Free news. Even free tools such as word processing and spreadsheets.

But almost two-thirds of adult Internet users in the U.S. have paid for access to at least one of these intangible items online, according to a new from the Pew Internet and American Life Project.

Whether people will pay for different types of material on the Web is among the most pressing questions facing media companies in the 21st century.

As people shift their attention to the Internet from more traditional ways of enjoying media, the companies that provide everything from movies to mystery novels want to make sure they can still get paid for what they do. The big TV networks want viewers to pay for full access to episodes of their favorite shows. Newspaper companies want readers to pay for news. want higher prices for digital editions of new releases.

The new figures from Pew suggest paying for content online is at least not a completely foreign idea for most people.

About a third of respondents said they have paid for digital music. Same for software.

Behind that came mobile apps for cell phones or tablet computers at 21 percent. Then digital games at 19 percent and newspaper, magazine or journal articles at 18 percent.

The survey found that among people who paid for content, the typical user spent about $10 a month. However, there are some extremely high-end users, such that the average among those who have paid for content is about $47 a month. That includes subscriptions and individual files downloaded or accessed.

The survey of 755 Internet users in the U.S. was conducted Oct. 28-Nov. 1 and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

©2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

3.5 /5 (8 votes)  

Filter


Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

alec123456789
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 4.6 / 5 (9)
There is a big difference between buying music or software that is distributed via the internet then for paying for access to the New York Times website.
Doug_Huffman
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 5 / 5 (5)
Pew's devil is in the details of their survey and in the details of the wording of their questions.

I will and do buy digital restriction management DRM FREE content, content of which I become the proprietor. I use open source software where ever possible.

A differentiation of DRM music from copyrighted NYT might be challenging, but, moot because all NYT content will appear elsewhere and DRM music is post-modern trash.
epsi00
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 5 / 5 (8)
They can charge all they want, I am not buying. simple. I still don't have an ipod, a cell phone and will not be getting an ipad or an icrap anytime soon. Music is played on local radio stations for free. news are provided by bloggers all around the world. I am paying my ISP for that. If they want to share it among themselves, it's fine with me.
Eikka
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 5 / 5 (7)

I will and do buy digital restriction management DRM FREE content, content of which I become the proprietor.


How do you determine the price of this content?

Since it's not made artifically scarce, the supply is basically infinite while the demand is not. By all means the price should approach zero, so what's the point of paying for it? But then, who pays the author?

The point is, that you shouldn't pay for it. The digital copies are worthless - the work put into making the original is the only thing that matters; if we pay for the subsequent copies, we're basically giving the author a money printing machine that completely disconnects the value of the work from the price we collectively pay for the work and breaks the market mechanism.

We no longer know what everything is worth, so we end up paying too much. Every song is 99 cents, good or bad. Eventually enough people will buy it to make a profit regardless.

That's why this whole thing has to be re-thought.
gopher65
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 5 / 5 (6)
I understand that providing content costs a certain amount of money, and I'm willing to pay so that both companies and individuals cover their costs and make a reasonably sized profit, if they're offering a desirable service. (For instance I subscribe to Netflix.)

What I'm not willing to do is pay the same amount of money for a digital book (which costs essentially NOTHING for the company to create and distribute) as I am for a paperback (which costs almost as much to create an distribute as the list price on the cover suggests).

I'll buy an e-book for 1 dollar *if* almost all of that money goes to the author. I won't buy it for 14 dollars only to see 1 dollar of that go to the author and 13 dollars go to the unbelievably greedy (and completely unnecessary) publisher.
gopher65
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 5 / 5 (7)
To add on to my last comment, I think what we're seeing with attitudes toward online payments is that people are starting to recognize that publishers are increasingly becoming unnecessary. We can get content from and pay content creators directly (authors, musicians, etc), without the need for a mass-scale middleman. In the olden days this wasn't true. Now it is.

So while I think that most people understand that content creators need to be paid (or else they'll stop creating (as much) content), I also think that people don't want to see the vast majority of the money they pay for content sopped up by useless third parties, to the detriment of both the consumers and the creators of the content in question.
StarDust21
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
I aint gonna pay crap. Let the net free as it has always been
an_p
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
I aint gonna pay crap. Let the net free as it has always been


but you pay the ISP for providing access to other peoples content.

and thats more than 10 bucks a month.

its like in medieval times when somebody took money for letting you cross a bridge.

i say free the infrastructure and let authors earn their money, hence 'enlightenment'!

stealthc
Dec 30, 2010

Rank: not rated yet
The internet is worth what you pay for it but what these people are charging is totally not worth it.

What sort of sucker spends $47 a month on this crap?
Simonsez
Jan 01, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
I think they should not have included purchases of apps and things bought on/for mobile phone devices. The people buying that crap are not equivalent to the people paying for a "landline" internet connection where those same or similar apps are open source and free for all (who have an internet connection).

I am fairly certain numbers would indicate home internet users pay for far less.
Quantum_Conundrum
Jan 02, 2011

Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Eikka:

The situation you are talking about is caused by transition to Type 1 communication and economy.

Information technology is essentially approaching "perfect competition". We can entertain ourselves with anything really, and no longer need (or want) million dollar circus clowns. Due to the explosion in technology, economics as we know it is collapsing. These millionaire clowns will no longer be able to rake in this sort of money just to sing a 3 minute song about leaving their boyfriend/girlfriend.
Rank 3.5 /5 (8 votes)
Relevant PhysicsForums posts

More news stories

SpotterRF debuts Radar Backpack Kit (w/ Video)

(Phys.org) -- SpotterRF has announced a special radar backpack kit designed to enhance situational awareness for soldiers on the ground. The company says its special radar is designed for warfighters as part ...

Technology / Hi Tech & Innovation

created 1 hour ago | popularity 5 / 5 (1) | comments 2 | with audio podcast report

Apple CEO Cook gives up $75M in stock dividends

(AP) -- Apple CEO Tim Cook is giving up $75 million in dividends on restricted stock that the company is awarding to all of its employees.

Technology / Business

created 22 hours ago | popularity 1.8 / 5 (4) | comments 2

Yahoo kills 'Livestand' just 6 months after debut

(AP) -- Yahoo is killing a tablet magazine called Livestand just six months its debut on the iPad.

Technology / Business

created 16 hours ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 1

Yahoo! ditches digital newsstand for iPads

Yahoo! shuttered its fledgling digital newsstand for iPads on Friday in what it said was the start of a product purge intended to make the floundering Internet pioneer more nimble.

Technology / Internet

created 17 hours ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0

Facebook IPO debacle raises investor dander

The spate of complaints and investigations over the Facebook stock offering suggests big institutions had an edge over small investors, raising questions about the process.

Technology / Business

created 18 hours ago | popularity not rated yet | comments 0


Family history of Alzheimer's affects functional connectivity

(HealthDay) -- Cognitively normal individuals with a family history of late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) may display lower resting state functional connectivity in the default mode network (DMN) of the brain, ...

Transvaginal mesh op restores pelvic organ prolapse at price

(HealthDay) -- Transvaginal mesh (TVM) procedures are effective for anatomical restoration of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), but patients report a worsening of sexual function following surgery, according to ...

Travel to high altitudes tied to Crohn's, colitis flare-ups

(HealthDay) -- People with inflammatory bowel disease, which includes Crohn's disease and colitis, may be at increased risk for flare-ups when they fly or travel to high altitudes for skiing or mountain climbing, ...

Thousands of shellfish found dead in Peru

Thousands of crustaceans were found dead off the coast of Lima following the mystery mass death of dolphins and pelicans, the Peruvian Navy said Friday.

Astronomers seize last chance in lifetime for Venus Transit

Astronomers are gearing for one the rarest events in the Solar System: an alignment of Earth, Venus and the Sun that will not be seen for another 105 years.

Australia hails surprise super-telescope decision

Australia has hailed a surprise decision giving it a role in a radio telescope project aimed at revolutionising astronomy, vowing to draw on its decades of experience in space science.