A comment applying the ideas from Wired’s “The Web is Dead, Long Live the Internet” article to the photography industry. Whether by app or Web, to the gatekeepers go the spoils.

Shannon Fagan, The Web is Dead, Long Live the Internet…, on ASMP Strictly Business:

To date, it was generally accepted that one must have “high-level” access to distribution and technology in order to succeed in photographic licensing online. In other words, to make real money, and a sustainable income, one needed to secure Getty distribution with a Canon, or perhaps a Nikon, camera in hand. There seems to have arisen an assumption amongst image content creators (and the smaller platforms assisting them) that perhaps in the future this dominance will not be as prevalent as “direct licensing” and other democratized access points level that higher playing field. This may be true. The Wired Magazine article’s macro view of what is happening on the Internet however, is interestingly counter to this argument. All stock content licensing is taking place online via the Internet. Chris Anderson and Michael Wolff give us a bit more to ponder about regarding our democratized future.

My comment:

“All stock content licensing is taking place online via the Internet.”

Well, yes. But the real question is how much is over the web (technically, if you’re licensing photos by accessing and paying for them over a browser, then it occurs over the Web) and how much is over other dedicated applications and peer-to-peer networks over the Internet. The real issue is how much licensing is done over closed gardens, closed areas where we have to get access.

“The Wired Magazine article’s macro view of what is happening on the Internet however, is interestingly counter to this argument.”

Not really.

The real question the article raises is about curation, personalization, closed gardens, and the rising power of closed gardens.

What Anderson and Wolff don’t really discuss, but could, is why certain apps and closed gardens succeed. Applying that to the stock photography industry, the question is slightly different: Why do we (as individual contributors) have to sell through big closed gardens, and not through big open ones, or smaller open ones? Why is the Getty of yesterday still the Getty of today, and what will change to shift the power away from the big access points? Why can alternative agencies succeed in some niches of stock photography, but fail in others? Why can some photographers succeed without Getty in some niches, but fail in others?

That’s the real area for thought from this article.

Whether by app or Web, to the gatekeepers go the spoils, and still true even as the role, raison d’etre and value of gatekeepers change.