created Mar 26, 2019
Over the past seven years, Medium.com has tried harder to find a sustainable business model than the newspaper industry has tried over the past 30 years. In my opinion.
It seems that the top innovative strategy offered by the newspaper industry is blaming others for the industry's problems. Blame the internet, the web, Craigslist, Google, Facebook, etc.
Medium.com has made numerous pivots over the past six-plus yeas, some a bit quicker than what seemed necessary. And these changes have negatively impacted some publishers. But those publishers CHOSE to store their content on someone else's platform, instead of hosting the content themselves. They traded the admin tax for hosting volatility.
Pubs are attracted by the lures dangled by Big Tech platforms. The next shiny thing might be the one that saves digital and print publishers. It seems that pubs have a fear of being left behind if they don't immediately glum onto every new initiative proffered by Big Tech.
But I have never understood the media's obsession with trying to label Medium. Why do the media constantly try to label and categorize everything? And why try to define Medium, based upon definitions from last century?
Medium.com is Medium.com. That's it. It's a website that hosts content, created by others.
Maybe the orgs that follow tech and the media should be as critical of the newspaper industry. What has the newspaper industry done to improve its standing in the digital information landscape besides build websites that mirror their print products?