At TEOF we talk mainly about the transition of web services from free to fee-based models. There is also the ongoing struggle of web content to find a working revenue model. Examples are the troubled Suck and Plastic, and yesterday's announcement of plans for a hostile takeover of Salon with intentions of firing everyone and piping in syndicated content.

Did anyone catch this one? In a May article, Slate's Michael Kinsley says "Almost no one pays for content in any medium." I've always wondered where advertisers get off demanding eyeball counts and click-through rates and whining about the low numbers for online advertising. How do they measure eyeballs and click-through for TV, radio, or print ads? They don't. They target the best they can and hope for some impact at the cash registers.

In a great example of the advertisers' double-standard, Kinsley recalls:

"A few weeks ago a producer from Nightline contacted Slate while researching a possible show on the crisis of content on the Internet. He wanted to know how on earth we could ever be a going business if we gave away our content for free. I asked how many people pay to watch Nightline. Answer: none. People pay for their cable or satellite hookup, and they pay for content on HBO, but Nightline and other broadcast programs thrive without a penny directly from viewers."