Content Creators & Web Model Design

[Phrase]

Content Creators and Web Model Design …

.

I've read that the current web design model - Web 2.0 - has made it difficult for 'content creators' to make a living. … Jaron Lanier in -"You Are Not A Gadget" - suggests that a Web - open 'provenance' model - would enable economic sustainability for content creators. ... any thoughts ?

.

So some questions are: … What are the characteristics of a Provenance Web Model which will help the creative community ? … Compare and contrast present Web 2.0 design model with the 'provenance' web model which Lanier refers to (Ted Nelson) ? … Can the 'provenance model' co-exist with Web 2.0, and if so can consumers be educated to make consuming choices which would support enhanced autonomy for the creative content originators. … What is the best way to formulate this discussion so that the narrative framing furthers positive constructive dialogue ? … Will awareness and understanding lead to a grass roots lobbying base necessary to push for changes ? … etc. ...

.

Too many questions for one thread. … Maybe this thread's function should be to formulate succinct questions which are more fully explored on appropriately linked threads. … In any case, this thread will indicate whether there is interest to discuss these issues. ... wishing to follow protocol .

.

I have not been able to find a blog devoted to exploring how the Web's technological design characteristics impact on the independant DIY music content creators. ...

.

I have much to learn.

.

Thank you for your time ! … phrase

[David Nahmani]

Very interesting topic.

 

Jaron Lanier in -"You Are Not A Gadget" - suggests that a Web - open 'provenance' model - would enable economic sustainability for content creators. ... any thoughts ?

So... I haven't read the books. Can you, in a nutshell, explain what is the open provenance model, and how content creators are remunerated?

[Phrase]

Hi David: … wonderful to be able to digitally converse … thanks

.

i also am learning … & look forward to becoming better informed, and refining my communication skills … ie. keep it simple when it's really complex. … in any case ...

.

let's begin with a general definition of 'provenance' … a noun -1: source/origin … 2: the history of ownership … ( there is an "open provenance model web site which is very technologically oriented )

.

Lanier in "You Are Not A Gadget" - Chapter 7 " The Prospects For Humanistic Cloud Economics " mentions the work of Ted Nelson , a " … formative figure in the development of online culture. He invented the digital media link and other core ideas of connected online media back in the 1960s. He called it "hypermedia". "

.

So the 'open provenance model' would access the original digital expression of … a song … for example; … the first posting of a work … straight from your DAW to the web site of choice.

.

… I suppose there would be some meta-data which would keep the digital media link in place. … This would enable originator recognition, which would then allow the originator to be awarded a 'payment' each time the file was accessed. … This access payment would be determined by an agreed upon algorithm … in accordance with culturally defined socio-economic criteria reflected in legislation. …

.

At this moment, … Web 2.0 … furthers anonymity … the master servers search engines (Google) replicates what was left out of the Web model design … Web 2.0 design mirrors the hierarchical paradigms prevalent today. … The ISPs are really not dumb pipes but deep packet inspection is costly and would have to be ordered by legislation etc. . Fortunes are being made today in this "free internet content" environment model. The master servers would like to keep everyone 'cloud' dependant. … They are using the design model to best commercial advantage.

.

To me, what Jaron Lanier is saying is that … provenance (source ) … when built into the Web model ( open provenance ) … allows autonomous content creators to be acknowledged and remunerated more directly. … The ramifications of this are paradigm altering.

.

… I am not an expert on any of this. … There are some very informative YouTube videos of Jaron Lanier … Also i've used my FB page as a journal on which these ideas are slowly taking shape . … Please feel welcome to browse & comment . ( ).

.

… I am sure that within your forum there are some vastly more informed individuals. … And there may be highly developed discussions which i just don't know about.

.

The subject is complicated, multifaceted, … Jaron Lanier's book is great, videos are informative. Maybe others are much more familiar with his work. … Time permitting i'll do my best to learn more … and input more. … It is a pleasure to be part of this forum.

.

Thank you David ! … best regards … phrase

Edited July 30, 2012 by Phrase

[David Nahmani]

I think that more important than the discussion of how to keep track of a digital work (which AFAIK is not that challenging) is the discussion of a model where the content providers get remunerated. How do you do that? YouTube proposes to embed ads in front of video and give some of the proceeds to the author of the video. The same thing could be designed for music. That allows visitors free access to the media, while being able to pay the author. There are two big problems with this model: first the distributors only give a ridiculous %age of their revenues to the video authors. We're far, very far away from the old publishing royalty model where a content provider could expect around 10% of the revenues generated by his work. We don't know what the percentages are, because we don't have access to the numbers, and because even the numbers don't tell us that much: when selling ads on YouTube, Google makes much more than what the client pays for its ad. But this is another discussion.

 

Another model is to have a paywall. Some new online distribution models are based on paywalls and are more or less successfull. Some models even give a choice to the user: paywall or ads.

 

To me the challenge lies in the fact that it seems to me like most web 2.0 visitors are expecting quality content for free and without pesky ads. So what's left? Product placement? Aren't we all tired of it already? Maybe, just maybe, capitalism has run its course?

 

[Rev. Juda Sleaze]

The paywall approach can work with some things, but look what has happened to newspapers; people are not willing to pay the cost of dedicated, international, indepth reporting. So now, apart from a few exceptions, we are left with agenda-driven news payrolled by the businesses that benefit from the viewpoint they endorse. People-power and blogs are ok, but to get a balanced view you have to do the job of a reporter anyway and source multiple sides of any argument or story. I know that it has always been that way to an extent, but it is getting extreme now. To find out what's going on in the headline stories on any given day I'll have to watch the BBC, Russia Today and Al-Jazeera English, then triangulate their bias to find some kind of "average truth". Of course, most people can't be bothered to do that, and will happily regurgitate the views endoresed by Bill O'Reilley, Jon Stewart, The National Enquirer, Michael Moore or whoever. It's much easier to have your opinions reinforced than challenged.

 

Although I've always found the Financial Times to be excellent for unbiased reporting (as far as I can tell). They tend to get closer to the truth because investor's money counts on it, and in general the more powerful echelons of society read it.

 

Whether or not we get rid of money, quality content of any kind requires resources, so at the end of the day someone has to pay. And illegal torrents and streaming sites are another difficulty faced by paywall services. If I download Boardwalk Empire from a P2P network, that effectively means that HBO and Sky Atlantic subscribers have paid for me to watch the show.

 

Slightly skewing off-topic, but I think Newspapers are a good example of people not willing to stump-up the cash for decent content.

 

I like Morgan's suit

[Phrase]

... It takes a little work to become familiar with Jaron Lanier's thoughts. ... He is speaking from outside the box. ... If possible, spending some quality time reading ..."You Are Not A Gadget" ... which explains and puts the issue of remuneration in context, would certainly raise the level of the discussion. ... Its a teleologically based argument if you will; ... design determines outcome. ... So instead of responding to what i consider misunderstandings, ... or rather lack of a fuller understanding, ... (which i am still acquiring myself) ... let me post some more Jaron Lanier.

.

... "To my friends in the “open” Internet movement, I have to ask: what did you think would happen? We in Silicon Valley undermined copyright to make commerce become more about services instead of content — more about our code instead of their files. The inevitable endgame was always that we would lose control of our own personal content, our own files. We haven’t just weakened Hollywood and old-fashioned publishers. We’ve weakened ourselves." ... Jaron Lanier

 

... from "The False Ideals of the Web ... yes , thanks , i hope this link works ! ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/opinion/sopa-boycotts-and-the-false-ideals-of-the-web.html?_r=1

... thanx Eriksimon

.

best regards ...

Edited July 30, 2012 by Phrase

[Rev. Juda Sleaze]

That link brings up a blank page for me.

 

So it looks like I'll have to live with not understanding and you'll have to be content with replying to yourself. Have a good discussion!

[Eriksimon]

Try this; link works, though it didn't re ... ally help me ... I quic ... kly.... drowned in paradigms... O yes...: "it's all abo ... ut the money - again!" Which is true.... but still...

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/opinion/sopa-boycotts-and-the-false-ideals-of-the-web.html?_r=1

[Rev. Juda Sleaze]

Still not working for me, though that link did get as far as having the symbol on the browser tab...

 

Drowning in paradigms doesn't sound that fun anyway.

[Phrase]

... Eriksimon ... thanks, the link in your post worked for me ... I tried to edit & correct mine ...

.

You are right. The article really did not speak of the ... "open provenance model" ... as a positive facilitator for DIY'ers. ... It also didn't speak of the current ... Web 2.0 design .. and how that design model's characteristics impact. ... I'll continue to delve into these topics, and post links etc. ... As previously stated, I was surprised at the lack of discussion on this topic . ...

.

So ... maybe the extent of this thread should be, ... firstly ... to suggest that to me ... Jaron Lanier's writings and thoughts are relevant to the creative content community ... especially in terms of Web Design and outcome.

.

The follow-up would be to more specifically ask :

.

...Has anyone read ... Jaron Lanier's ... "You Are Not A Gadget" ... , watched any videos or read any articles by him ... and if so ... now, being somewhat familiar ... what are your thoughts on ... Content Creators & Web Model Design. ... ?

.

I'm still in the formative stages myself ... Thank you for your patience ! ... musically yours ... phrase ...

[Phrase]

discussion of a model where the content providers get remunerated. How do you do that? YouTube proposes to embed ads in front of video and give some of the proceeds to the author of the video. The same thing could be designed for music. That allows visitors free access to the media, while being able to pay the author.

.

... David there are many issues touched upon in your reply ...

... If i may, let me briefly quote from Lanier on the ascendancy of the 'Ad Culture' ... from "You Are Not A Gadget" p.83 ...

.

"If you want to know what is really going on in a society or ideology, follow the money. If money is flowing to advertising instead of musicians, journalists and artists, then a society is more concerned with manipulation than truth or beauty. ... If content is worthless, then people will start to become empty-headed and contentless."

.

"The combination of the hive mind and advertising has resulted in a new kind of social contract. The basic idea of this contract is that authors, journalists, musicians, and artists are encouraged to treat the fruits of their intellects and imaginations as fragments to be given without pay to the hive mind. Reciprocity takes the form of self-promotion. Culture is to become precisely nothing but advertising."

.

... a little further ahead on p. 87 Jaron Lanier wrote ... " If we choose to pry culture away from capitalism while the rest of life is still capitalistic, culture will become a slum. " ... To me, this is a crucial level of understanding which places a sense of urgency in building more humane alternatives ...

.

... So, as the context of the discussion grows in shared understanding, and to refer back to the thread's subject, ... an open provenance web design model ... could facilitate digital remuneration without the necessity of Ads. ... I sort of sketched the flow chart of such here ...

… I suppose there would be some meta-data which would keep the digital media link in place. … This would enable originator recognition, which would then allow the originator to be awarded a 'payment' each time the file was accessed. … This access payment would be determined by an agreed upon algorithm … in accordance with culturally defined socio-economic criteria reflected in legislation. …

.

... this description is how i would articulate the flow-back ... again, i'm sure there are some very elegant/complex descriptions out there ... i just haven't found them as yet ... also, you know, even within the above there are issues ... & concerns ... maybe i'm going to far at this point ... to mention legislation and socio-economic dimensions ... so ... strike that ... for now ...

.

somewhere Lanier mentions that consumers may be able to lobby to ask for a 'data pay option' to co-exist within Web 2.0 ... i'll try to find out more ... another level

.

till later ... best regards ... phrase

[Rev. Juda Sleaze]

... David there are many issues touched upon in your reply ...

... If i may, let me briefly quote from Lanier on the ascendancy of the 'Ad Culture' ... from "You Are Not A Gadget" p.83 ...

.

"If you want to know what is really going on in a society or ideology, follow the money. If money is flowing to advertising instead of musicians, journalists and artists, then a society is more concerned with manipulation than truth or beauty. ... If content is worthless, then people will start to become empty-headed and contentless."

.

"The combination of the hive mind and advertising has resulted in a new kind of social contract. The basic idea of this contract is that authors, journalists, musicians, and artists are encouraged to treat the fruits of their intellects and imaginations as fragments to be given without pay to the hive mind. Reciprocity takes the form of self-promotion. Culture is to become precisely nothing but advertising."

.

... a little further ahead on p. 87 Jaron Lanier wrote ... " If we choose to pry culture away from capitalism while the rest of life is still capitalistic, culture will become a slum. " ... To me, this is a crucial level of understanding which places a sense of urgency in building more humane alternatives ...

 

What humane alternatives though?

 

Arguably the best environment for craft and quality are feudal societies. Unfortunately they have an even worse reputation for social equality than capitalism.

 

Follow the money indeed, but if you do that through history, you'll find that no matter what political system or social contract is in place, the people who control the resources create, or allow, systems whereby wealth always flows to them. Why would they do otherwise?

[David Nahmani]

an open provenance web design model ... could facilitate digital remuneration without the necessity of Ads. ... I sort of sketched the flow chart of such here ...… I suppose there would be some meta-data which would keep the digital media link in place. … This would enable originator recognition, which would then allow the originator to be awarded a 'payment' each time the file was accessed. … This access payment would be determined by an agreed upon algorithm … in accordance with culturally defined socio-economic criteria reflected in legislation. …

 

This, to me, is not a "model", it's just a description of the technology that could be used to track and remunerate the author. That technology already exists, in fact it's already in use, so nothing new is touched upon. The real question is: where does the money come from? From paywalls? Subscriptions? Ads? Taxes?

[Eric Cardenas]

[ski]

Now hold on with yer holdin' on there...

 

 

In the world of sharks, which represents the lesser of two evils: the record companies who actually foster artistic development (or at least they used to!), or the millions of people all over the world who outright steal an artist's music? See, it can't all be about "those evil record companies". Even if it were, they've done a pretty darn good job over the years getting music to the masses, bankrolling tours, and so on.

 

If an artist is getting ripped off by a record company, that's the artist's business, no one else's. And if an artist is making a ton of money off of their music, that's also no one else's business either. Yet the notion of "someone's making too much money" is often cited as justification for not paying for music at all.

 

There may not be such thing as "the perfect remuneration model", but jeez, we live in a world of very bright people and no one's been able to come up with a solution? Why is that? Well, in part, every good idea has to fight against the tide of the social phenomenon of entitlement to everyone else's intellectual property.

[Rev. Juda Sleaze]

If an artist is getting ripped off by a record company, that's the artist's business, no one else's.

 

But in the days of record company power, they controlled the distribution. I'm not particularly saying one way is better than the other, but some democratization of distribution is a good thing in my eyes.

 

And if an artist is making a ton of money off of their music, that's also no one else's business either.

 

Agreed.

 

Yet the notion of "someone's making too much money" is often cited as justification for not paying for music at all.

 

Yeah, that's dumb.

 

There may not be such thing as "the perfect remuneration model", but jeez, we live in a world of very bright people and no one's been able to come up with a solution? Why is that? Well, in part, every good idea has to fight against the tide of the social phenomenon of entitlement to everyone else's intellectual property.

 

People wanting stuff for free is not a new thing. My teenage cassette collection had maybe 3-5% bought albums, the rest were copied from friends.

 

I don't see it as the people breaking the record industry, I see it as the advertising industry breaking the record industry. Torrent sites would not survive without their sponsors. The advertising industry has shown us an exemplary feat of capatalist darwinism: not only did they exploit the technology of the internet, but they also exploited all the hopes, visions and ideology that came with it. The people making money from it do not want a solution.