[8392] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: WSJ Technology supplement
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Clay Shirky)
Wed Nov 17 11:01:02 1993
From: Clay Shirky <clays@panix.com>
To: BRIGGS@ab.wvnet.edu (Carl Briggs, Public Relations)
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1993 10:18:23 -0500 (EST)
Cc: COM-PRIV@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <01H5CT93LAG2DU6TS6@WVNVMS.WVNET.EDU> from "Carl Briggs, Public Relations" at Nov 15, 93 07:21:44 pm
>
>Granted, there was a big gap in the lack of mention of publishers going online
> But the WSJ has been good -- as have the NYT, _Fortune_, _Forbes_, others --
>in discussing these developments _as they happen_.
>
I have to disagree with the idea of the Journal's failure to discuss online
publishers as a "gap". The Journal itself recently got into the business of
online service, and as they (and other papers) begin to shift from
paper-based to electronic distribution, the other publishers making that
shift are the competition. I believe that the whole supplement was a kind
of "newsvertisement" from a company (Dow Jones) about to become a big player
in the telecomm world.
Also, did anyone else find their "Projected Market Share/1997" chart as
bizarre as I did? The idea that Prodigy will be three times more profitable
than AOL in 1997 seems impossible to me, given the situation on the ground now.
--
clays
"Nothing in the world lasts
Save eternal change" Ode to the Coming of Spring, Marquis de Racan
