Respondendo a uma pergunta sobre conteúdo gratis ou pago na Internet, tentei o seguinte texto.
The problem begins with the way the question is presented-as many times happens. "Content". What do you mean? Anything that can be stored and delivered in paper, magnetic waves, electric impulses? Is "content" the Odyssey, a porn star's interview, the Yellow Pages, a phone call, the Guernica, my daughter's love poem, a classified ad, a recipe, images of man walking on the moon, Bach's sonatas (the written music, a great pianist recording, my school teacher playing...), Princess Diana's dying photos, stock market last second information, Booz Allen strategic plan for a 1 billion company, your therapist's notes?
Let's assume your a fine wine producer, located in the heart of Borgogna region. You have a friend who produces great perfumes in Paris and one other who is into the rat poison business. A fourth is a bottle producer, asking if the future is into plastic or glass bottles. He looks at you all (plus the one on the water business, one more selling shampoo, other producing chemicals for the industry...) as "content producers". Will you agree with his deffinition?
Discussing content is interesting only if you own, produce or sell tubes and bottles -if are into the distribution or storage business, a cable, a mobile opperator. If your on the other side, my friend, you are the first person who wants to avoid this denomination. The problem is that "content" is the way people into the entertainment and information business are calling what they produce and sell -and they are wrong.
The first reason is that you lose the focus: of course, I pay u$ 25 (yes, 25 American dollars at Blackwell) a 3 pages paper from a well known specialist in Kant, and I am the same person who avoids paying a newspapers subscription and prefer to read it online (but at the airport, I pay a very expensive copy of Le Monde and El Pais that I can read when flying). So, content for free or not, it depends...
But the main problem of calling it content is because you transform something that is essentially a service into a product. Give me information of a blue chip company strategic move for free one week late, and will probably thank you -and use for an academic paper, or maybe to package a fish I caught. Give that one they before they actually make the move and I will probably be ready to pay you a lot (well, not really, since it might be a crime if I use it to get rich).
Yesterday's weather forecast and soccer results or tomorrow's? Flight delay delivered automatically into my handheld, I will pay. Information as a service (useful information, when and where needed) most people will pay. Commodity information, they probably wont. As for entertainment, it also depend on the what, when and where.
So, please, be specific. Don't ask me if I ready to pay for (bottled) content; instead, tell me if it is a great isles scotch, a drug for cancer or just plain water. And tell when and where: what need your content will fulfill. There will be occasions for a high price water and a worthless whisky...
(And, yes, I agree with Caspar de Bono: free content is not really free, but someone is paying for it or rather for your time or attention.)
