Economics of web content

I appreciate many readers commenting or providing feedback by email on my question last week "Would you pay for my content?".

In the meantime, have seen two extreme sets of views on the economics of web content:

Seth Godin, uber-Marketer, tells his audience "Not only can't I imagine charging for my blog, I'm practically in debt to the people who read it. I ought to pay them, not the other way around. Every time you read something I write here, you're giving me a gift... attention."
Scott Adams, creator of Dilbert on the other hand goes "I have decided to blog less....My book based on the blog posts, STICK TO DRAWING COMICS, MONKEY-BRAIN! got great reviews for content, but angry reactions in people who feel that other people, who didn’t read the content on the Internet, and never will, should not buy the book, to protect the rights of the people who already read it on the Internet, and might want to read it again for free sometime. You win...It’s hard to tell the family I can’t spend time with them because I need to create free content on the Internet that will lower our income."

and then this debate on Motley Fool on whether the online WSJ should stick with paid subscriptions or go free"

Anand Chokkavelu thinks Murdoch  is "four times smart" for giving  up maybe $ 200 m in subscription revenues for an advertising potential many times greater
Rich Smith thinks Murdoch is "four times stupid" for wasting a huge brand like the WSJ

So where are we headed? Not sure, probably some middling, muddled model.

But in the meantime, I am fantasizing that Seth takes over the Yankees and pays me for 6 hours of commute and game time - grateful for my attention -)