The two first comments of the Mozilla’s mission in the context of digital advertising post show how wide can be the mission to keep a user-centric web :
- Advertising is maybe no more the better way of funding for the future.
- Give more info to the publishers, so they can decide to block you content access (instead of innovating in they funding strategy). I would see in that comment that it is a fair exchange: at least the publisher should give more control to the users.
We could even go forward user-centric web funding taking account on opportunities and dangers :
- More you (help) advertise, more you centralize the Internet and the web
The actual economic model history on the Internet, is the exchange of personal data for advertising against free access to content. This have prove to be hugely monopolistic and centralize the Internet on a few actors that are now driving it and can decide the rules that apply to the personal data.
Ad publishers want the more audience so they use the biggest ad platform. We should care about ad platform diversity and how is controlled they personal data policies.
- There is an emerging alternative to the advertising for funding 1
The Makers economy is changing the FOOS economy. It’s a knid of Open Apple : a new economic in traction between hardware and software using Open for the enterprise and the users. And what for the Open Web ? Mozilla is going forward with mobile devices : an opportunity for the foundation and the community ?
- Advertising is a huge and important issue to independence
The press is a need for democracy. From paper to web many newspapers used the freemium model trying to monetize more they audience than the quality, relying on advertisement for funding and powering auto-censorship to keep sustainable.
This mechanism of control is more subtle than ‘I own your personal data’ and is more powerful/dangerous as it care about the platform not the content. So any switch there can drive a huge amount of people at once.
Recent studies about the Social Web show that people auto-censor to keep control on they digital identity even saying bad or untrue thinks about them.
How can Mozilla work with advertisers keeping it’s & it users independence is an important question. The Web is a public good : why not promoting a legal form of business that help advertiser make business with public good as an opportunity not as a constraint and take them to support the content producers without interfere in the editorial line ?
We should really be consistent that going the way, making compromise, we don’t go to the opposite to ours mission and replace ours by other’s mission.
Update: This post has been published as a comment to the Mozilla’s post.
- The makers business model : The principle is to develop an open source hardware product to benefit from the innovation of “makers” interested in the solution. This community becomes a source of innovation and reputation represents a relay. It promotes (and often helps) any crowdfunding campaign, become almost indispensable step for young entrepreneurs in the hardware. The company will then market the finished product or in parts.
Incubator teams like Haxlr8r believes in the possibility for start-ups to become profitable while leaving open the design of their products.
Facebook recently announced Facebook Open Compute that gain traction to GAFA’s : Microsoft, HP, Intel, Apple …
Cossing this, it seems there is an opportunity for big and small companies. ↩