A big part of the problem is that &quot;content&quot; insists on being wrapped up in &quot;interactivity&quot; that is confusing and subtracts value (or adds cost) in other ways (image carousels with ads, articles broken into lots of small pieces to generate impressions), and the internet routes around cost.<p>The central thesis that &quot;pretending that content is free&quot; is the underlying problem is interesting. Perhaps part of the problem is bad pricing. E.g. content that <i>ought</i> to be cheap (e.g. e-books, streaming video) tends to be more expensive or certainly insufficiently cheaper than content that ought to be more expensive (e.g. physical books, bluray disks).<p>Perhaps a big part of the problem is publishers &quot;pretending&quot; they add value.<p>Some publishers definitely add <i>some</i> value, but then they subtract value in other ways -- it&#x27;s great that the movie studio figures out who the good writers, directors, and actors are and risks its own money to make a good movie, but it&#x27;s bad that it&#x27;s provided on a bluray disk with annoying copy-and-other protection in a hard-to-open package, and that it&#x27;s more expensive to buy the cheaper to distribute and generally more convenient electronic version. Similarly, newyorker.com has great writing (and I pay for it) but the actual presentation layer (the website) subtracts value from it.