Comments on: Review: “Free: The Future of a Radical Price” by Chris Anderson

By: Elly Hower

Elly Hower — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 07:08:00 +0000

Thank you a lot for giving everyone an exceptionally breathtaking chance to read in detail from here. It is always so kind and as well , jam-packed with a good time for me personally and my office co-workers to search your site at least 3 times in one week to learn the latest items you have. And definitely, I am just actually astounded considering the staggering information you serve. Some 2 areas in this post are without a doubt the most beneficial we’ve ever had.
http://www.styrofoam-online.co.uk
Hotwire Cut Styrofoam

By: To click or not to click: Could tiered data plans water down advertising possibilities for news publishers? » Nieman Journalism Lab

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:01:20 +0000

[...] went unlimited, Internet use exploded in our house — and everywhere. It’s a version of Chris Anderson’s “mental transaction costs” — even “very cheap” forces a thought process that “free” does [...]

By: Ninjaclectic – Chris Anderson on the future of TV, Youtube

Ninjaclectic – Chris Anderson on the future of TV, Youtube — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:06:32 +0000

[...] Chris Anderson is the Editor-in-chief of Wired magazine and has a new book called The Future of Radical Price. [...]

By: Kranten = iTunes om wereld te verbeteren - Frankwatching

Kranten = iTunes om wereld te verbeteren - Frankwatching — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:02:05 +0000

[...] book ‘Free, The Future Of A Radical Price’, laat Chris Anderson zien dat micropayments ook niet werken, simpelweg door de manier waarop onze hersenen werken. Zelfs als je maar een klein beetje moet [...]

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:11:55 +0000

I think it is a mistake to conflate the freedom to copy and link stories with the a) free classified ads (via craigslist et al), b) monopolization of retail sales (with subsequent ad losses) and c) ongoing reconstruction of the economy (fewer car dealers buying ads, fewer builders selling homes) of the current mini-depression, as a reason for the decline in newspaper employment. The circulation audit scandal set metros pricing power back much further than Huffington Post, why would advertisers believe the circ numbers ever after that?

The danger is people will mistake bloggers as the reason for the lower-quality and lower amounts of news already here, and on its way, rather than the legislators who rewired our economy after the oil embargo era to enable b) and c), and publishers, too short-sighted to forestall a). This is dangerous because very different responses are needed to fix things, depending on what you see as the root cause of the situation. You could shoot yourself going after bloggers when what is really needed is a news site that beats Craiglist and attracts ads in an era of people buying underwear from Amazon, not Macys.

By: Micropayments and the power of free » Nieman Journalism Lab

Micropayments and the power of free » Nieman Journalism Lab — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 16:06:21 +0000

[...] another bit of evidence of how enormously price-sensitive people are in a digital environment. As Chris Anderson will tell you, free is an entirely different animal from any price — even one as insignificant as 99 cents. [...]

By: Between Channel and Content « Never Neutral

Between Channel and Content « Never Neutral — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:04:45 +0000

[...] -Chris Anderson via Twitter, 29 July 2009. [...]

By: James Tobin

James Tobin — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:58:21 +0000

Would we agree that as the price of a commodity approaches zero, the value of that commodity usually diminishes, too? Stuff that’s given out for free — plastic gimmicks, public-relations materials, the content of most blogs — is seldom much good. Why should a creator devote talent, time and toil to the creation of a commodity for which he/she receives no return other than satisfaction? Sure, people put stuff on the web for free, with no advertising. But most of it is crap. If you want something good, you have to pay for it. Otherwise no one will make the good thing in the first place.

By: EP

EP — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 06:25:36 +0000

Interesting interview with Anderson in NPR.

By: Semana em revista (12-19/07/2009) | Afinidades Eletivas

Semana em revista (12-19/07/2009) | Afinidades Eletivas — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 04:05:05 +0000

[...] Semana passada rolou um burburinho de que NYTimes irá cobrar cerca de US$ 5/mês para aceder a todo o conteúdo do site. Logo em seguida Joshua Benton, diretor do Nieman Journalism Lab, escreveu um ótimo artigo defendendo que, se é para cobrar, que cobre logo 10, 15 dólares. Na terça-feira (16) foi a vez de Lionel Barber, editor do Financial Times, afirmar que no prazo de um ano quase todos os veículos de comunicação irão cobrar por seu conteúdo online. Caso Barber esteja certo, esta política vai de encontro com a teoria defendida por Chris Anderson no seu mais recente livro, Free. [...]

By: Jens

Jens — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:13:07 +0000

info_marvin:
Yes, no access from Europe on Google Books. Lame.

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:51:48 +0000

Lucas, try looking up “The Chaos Scenario” by Bob Garfield. Is there enough advertising out there to support all of this free content? http://thechaosscenario.net/blog/

By: El Oso » Archive » [Review] The Big Switch: Rewiring The World, From Edison to Google

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:46:44 +0000

[...] itself. It also gets a hell of a lot cheaper. So cheap, in fact, that Chris Anderson makes the controversial argument that free is the future of business Indeed, when was the last time you paid for anything [...]

By: info_maven

info_maven — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:51:10 +0000

Find the book also in Google Books – is it geographically limited there too? http://bit.ly/7rbE9

By: Alastair

Alastair — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:13:15 +0000

I discovered that trying to view Chris Anderson’s “Free” on Scribd will give a rather discriminatory error message:

“Sorry, this content is geographically restricted. Due to our agreements with our publishing partners, the document you requested is only available to users located in the United States.”

I consider that by itself sheer real-world demonstration of a major loophole in Anderson’s thesis. He is Wired, mind you. And he is talking about the Internet, isn’t he?

By: Pat

Pat — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:19:40 +0000

Unabridged “Free” audiobook is also available for free on Audible.com, but ironically the abridged version will cost you $18.99.

By: Dear New York Times: Please charge me more than $5 for your web site. » Nieman Journalism Lab

Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:00:58 +0000

[...] It ignores the lessons of micropayments. There’s been plenty of debate over Chris Anderson’s Free, but one of his strongest arguments is that there’s a huge mental gap between something [...]

By: MichaelJ

MichaelJ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:02:30 +0000

Lucas,
In my humble opinion,you make exactly the right point. TV and Print are the two mass push media. So it was, so it will be. The internet and all the media that is associated with it are optimized for pull communication, searching,buying, talking and storing. If a web ad leads to a sell through it works. But gathering eyeballs in a pull media won’t work, unless the issue is to gather and support fans.

As for “free.” A more useful concept might be “free-to-me” As Gladwell pointed out brilliantly in his review at the New Yorker, the Internet is not free. It is supported by huge server farms taking up very significant amounts of energy through very expensive fiber optic cables.

Yes the marginal costs are very low, but that’s because the infrastructure is so expensive. It’s similar to any infrastructure, the water system, the “free highways”, the under priced mass transit systems.

One role for the journalist with this infrastructure was beautifully described in the video that Matt Thompson did years ago. The emerging value in an information rich environment is to edit, curate and deliver the most interesting content to communities of fans.

By: Lucas Pattan

Lucas Pattan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:29:39 +0000

I’ve been listening to Anderson’s audiobook off and on for the past few days. My one thought on his analysis? He’s never watched television.

Anderson’s approach to analyzing “Free” is wonderful, but he persistently alludes to an approach to marketing that’s been perfected since the days of Farnsworth. Television content is free, has a low entry cost (TVs for about $200), and is paid for by advertisers. Why would computers be any different?

But throughout the portion I’ve listened to, he never says it outright: “Computers are the televisions of the 21st century – they are vehicles for advertisements.” Not only does he not address this, he seems to be at a loss for how to describe the business model ABC, NBC, and CBS perfected long ago.