My friend 
Things looked to be a good time, what with the Battle Pass for Season 9 came out, when I collided into another obstacle on the road to games and user generated content.
'You've read your last free article. Subscribe to continue reading. Subscribe for unlimited access.' Many phrases come up in conversation when companies speak their loquacious and conspicuous capitalism to our unsuspecting ears.
After a quick result for definitions, I see my logic spelled out simply. Take Netflix, for example. A colloquial culture turns a streaming service into a euphemism that everyone recognizes at a glance. Naturally, to attract new users, the platform offers three levels of subscription: basic, standard and premium. Basic permits ads, while premium offers more selection, no ads- paid productions like movies and television sitcoms "fit" into the freemium mode. Does your news?
I realize that as digital media revolutionized the role of print media, businesses face a challenge to generate profit without physical goods. As such, a large swath of consumers and business shift their attention to content monetization, in order to maintain their business delivering value. Does that mean I should subscribe to Vogue?
I think my biggest gripe comes from the ubiquity of ads, coercion to paid services and the ongoing sale of my information to the highest bidding enterprise. I'm startled so many people assert so certainly their devices listen to them. The very claim sounds like fanatical, something someone with tin foil on their head would say. Yet, without many academic references and footnotes, the general public remains fairly aware their data, history, cookies and breadcrumbs change hands for overwhelming amounts they may not ever see a fraction of.
So, what do we do about it?
I don't have many solutions for this situation. As a matter of fact, to read those good publications, who deserve every penny for their role in democratization of media,
If you've found that helpful, I recommend supporting my claim to a new model: delegation. Why? Subscriptions no longer work in a peer-to-peer world. If you're lonely or otherwise uninformed, you watch content made by Andrew Tate. If you enjoy free speech and hard hitting media, you watch Tucker Carlson ambitiously. Follow Gordon Ramsay or Ina Garten on Youtube for recipe ideas and cooking tips. Netflix for movies, the list goes down to where you get your hygiene and shaving necessities. The perspective I want to offer insight on follows: when you miss a payment or cut costs to make ends meet this month, you lose rest of the month's worth of subscription you paid for. You also do not get a refund. These services ping you at their will, seemingly right when you overspend a tranche of your balance, just to email you that the payment method bounced. Why not just assign the value of a year's subscription to an account instead? Here, Fitbit, take $120 for the year, and transact with that purchasing power.
The first reason my solution doesn't work everywhere sounds simple. Delegation doesn't work for all businesses. Those who offer content and skills knowledge, though, really benefit. Thinking about an artist makes a clichéd example. It works, but imagine an online tutor, who rather than getting paid hourly, when their student definitely needs a month-long campaign of their time to entirely overhaul study habits and their learning environment, gets a delegation instead. They have a purchasing power proportional to their rate times so many hours, and now, they have a lump sum's value in their pocket. They can spread that value around to other economies, for various needs.
In essence, I think that if you create content, you want delegators not subscribers. Of course, in general, you want fans, or more specifically consumers of your content. On this particular blogging site, even readersby (passersby but for blogs) become patrons of my posts by voting. If my words bring people any type of value at all, how simple would it be to avoid payment altogether and virtually bestow their subscription cost in the form of a delegation instead?
I might be deluded. Then again, I feel like I'm onto something, especially if it's shrewdly disruptive to the status quo.
