In his recent book, Jeff Jarvis asked “What Would Google Do?” Google asks, “What would Junior Soprano do?”
One of the cleverer gambits to avert the utter collapse of
the media economy is the experiment by Google called Contributor. It enables users (so far by invitation only, but soon to open to the public) to block ads on their favorite Web sites by instead
paying small sums a la carte for the content. And it does so with the ultimate nod to the free market… with maybe just a hint of the black one.
It’s easy to understand why
previous micropayment schemes failed to take hold: 1) they tend to be cumbersome, 2) the cost of processing micropayments typically exceeds the face value of the transaction, and 3) people like micro,
but not as much as they like zero. Free is a very popular price.
Of course, free isn’t really free; in the content marketplace, someone is always left holding the bag -- mainly exploited
contributors, legacy media companies bleeding retained earnings and venture capitalists betting on the come that seldom comes. But, Google pondered: what if a month’s worth of micropurchases
were prepaid in a modest chunk, like a Metro fare card -- thus reducing transaction costs -- and the micropayer were to enjoy not just content but a less ad-riddled experience?
advertisement
advertisement
Instead of,
say, Ken Fisher’s 99 newsletter come-ons or some sleazy Taboola clickbait, users are served a picture of (naturally) a kitten.
That’s the offer of Google Contributor. But
here’s the wrinkle: the price you pay to see the kitty (or a simple “thank you” message) instead of an ad is the price an advertiser would have paid for that very space.
Without being aware of it, Contributor users inject themselves in the hidden world of real-time ad auctions. Their winning (automated) bids, debited from their fixed monthly contributions, buy freedom
from Ken Fisher, or LowerMyBills.com or that pair of Uggs they looked at on Amazon in February and has been stalking them across the Web ever since.
One way to look at it is as a win-win:
users get a nicer experience without stiffing publishers, in the unfortunate way that popular ad-blocking software does. And they cease to be moochers, replacing the advertiser subsidy penny for
penny.
Of course, it’s not a panacea for the media economy, because there is no additional revenue to publishers. Also, there’s an altogether different way of looking at
Contributor:
“Hey, you have a nice place here. It would be a shame if some misfortune were to befall it, like a fire…or weight-loss advertising. Pony up.”
Yes,
the shakedown model. Your monthly Contributor contribution takes cash out of the till to buy protection from Madison Avenue. This is the media world we live in: third parties coming in to impose order
amid chaos.
And chaotic it is. Digital revolution has played havoc with supply and demand, audiences haven’t so much fragmented as atomized, and piracy and DVRs and fraud have ravaged
what’s left of the business models. Across the country, newspapers are shrinking to the size of the flimsy supplements that once were stuffed inside. Magazines are folding like rug stores. Cable
is dying the death of 1000 cord-cuts. Hollywood is making the same comic-superhero movie over and over in (I think we’re up to, what, 6-D?), until the last Shanghai teenager has had his fill. As
for the record business -- it has ceased to be either.
For years, I’ve been writing about denial and delusion. But if you squint your eyes a certain way, you can see the emergence of
certain familiar means of finding opportunity amid chaos. Where certain established structures collapse, others have always filled the vacuum. In the post-apocalyptic media environment,
Britain’s The Telegraph takes a cut from bookies. Hundreds of publishers of easy virtue run “native advertising,” which prostitutes their trust for a few cheap clicks. And
now, like some badly dressed Bensonhurst mooks, Google plays bagman.
Like I said, you have to squint. The real ad crime is online bot fraud, malware, etc., costing marketers billions. And I
have absolutely no doubt that Contributor was conceived with only altruistic intentions.
But ain’t it funny what instincts kick in when the established order starts breaking down? Squint
your eyes just a little bit more. Think of rackets muscling into legitimate businesses and busting them out. Now think: Facebook.