Most of those sites (and very near 100% when weighted by traffic) are funded by ads, though.
There are people on youtube supported by patreon and donations. There are periodicals/substacks/etc supported by subscriptions.
Most of these have a model where some visitors pay while others don’t pay and see ads. Substack is an exception, with free users not seeing any ads, but I’d bet that this is just them being new (most new sites deprioritize advertising to maximize growth) and that in a few years they’ll show ads to free users, limit how many articles you can read as a free user, or both.
There is not a shortage of content, there is a shortage of curation.
I think this is mostly not true? Unless you want to call standard journalism curation?
But this is also in the world today, one which has ads. I think you’d need to claim that even if we, say, banned ads, we’d still not see a shortage of content?
Most of those sites (and very near 100% when weighted by traffic) are funded by ads, though.
Most of these have a model where some visitors pay while others don’t pay and see ads. Substack is an exception, with free users not seeing any ads, but I’d bet that this is just them being new (most new sites deprioritize advertising to maximize growth) and that in a few years they’ll show ads to free users, limit how many articles you can read as a free user, or both.
I think this is mostly not true? Unless you want to call standard journalism curation?
But this is also in the world today, one which has ads. I think you’d need to claim that even if we, say, banned ads, we’d still not see a shortage of content?
I think the only content left would be the actual art. not the stuff that only deserves the name content.