Who's reading?
I just got a rather nasty e-blast from a publisher of a literary journal, basically castigating everyone who's submitted work for not also being paid subscribers. He said that if 1 out of every 200 persons who submitted work actually read the journal, he might be able to keep the journal afloat. It was a desperate, if not painfully honest, plea and posed some serious questions.
If Web 2.0 and the global collaborative community are giving everyone the means to write their own stories/news/information, are we in jeopardy of reducing the number of actual readers?
By having more information within reach, are we more well-read or more interested in how others may receive our own stories?
Does this angry editor have a valid point, or do you think he's simply reacting to the cold reality that the traditional media can't deal with the paradigm shift?
If Web 2.0 and the global collaborative community are giving everyone the means to write their own stories/news/information, are we in jeopardy of reducing the number of actual readers?
By having more information within reach, are we more well-read or more interested in how others may receive our own stories?
Does this angry editor have a valid point, or do you think he's simply reacting to the cold reality that the traditional media can't deal with the paradigm shift?