[lit-ideas] Fleeing the Internet

[Eternitytime1@xxxxxxx]

Hi,
Walt Crawford is very well respected in the library field...

Thought this was interesting as we recently were discussing the issue of 'phone 
and instant messages...

Still online,
Marlena in Missouri


Fleeing the Internet: Time to Call It Quits? 

By Walt Crawford - November 2003 Issue, Posted Nov 03, 2003

http://www.econtentmag.com/?ArticleID=5697
All Content Copyright © 1998-2004 EContentmag.com - All Rights Reserved 

Millions of Americans have stopped using the Internet. That's what a recent Pew 
study shows—42% non-users, 17% former Internet users who've dropped out. 
They're fleeing the Web, avoiding online, dropping dialup, and banning 
broadband. The Internet? That's so 20th century!

Is this the beginning of the end? Should econtent providers wise up and switch 
to print? Or is the study wrong? I'll argue that the answers are no, maybe, and 
no—but mostly that the Pew study may be a useful reality check for 
over-ambitious ebusiness plans.

"The Ever-Shifting Internet Population"
That's the title of the Pew report, published April 16, 2003. You can download 
it from www.pewInternet.org. It's a 46-page PDF, one in a series of Pew studies 
on the Internet in American life. The most important and (I believe) least 
surprising fact in the report may be this one: "42% of Americans say they don't 
use the Internet." That seems to concern the researchers, perhaps more than it 
should.

Those who live in households where someone else does use the Internet get a 
classic Pew/Internet label: "Net evaders." I would suggest that these people 
have no real need to use the Internet at home, particularly since someone else 
does—but to Pew's researchers, they're evading it, the way you might evade 
taxes or the draft. Then there are dropouts, the figure most often quoted: 17% 
of non-users at this point, a growing proportion. Some 24% of non-users "have 
no direct or indirect experience with the Internet."

Most non-users know where to go for Internet access, like libraries for 
example. They could go online if they wanted to, and (apparently) 76% of them 
know how. But most non-users have no plans to go online, at least at home. They 
feel no need or desire to use the Net. They don't think it's a good use of 
their time. For many of them, that's an appropriate judgment.

The researchers seem startled to find that people who have experienced the 
wonders of the Web could go offline for a while (or permanently). How is that 
possible? Maybe because the Internet was not a good use of their time, they 
didn't need it, or they didn't want it. Maybe the wonders of the Web were 
overhyped—and still are.

The Myth of the Ever-Growing Pie 
I see no reason to doubt the Pew numbers. At this point, U.S. Internet 
penetration in homes is barely growing. For millions of Americans, online 
access at home is a regular monthly expense that doesn't offer enough value to 
justify its cost—and, of course, many more millions of Americans neither have 
nor particularly need a personal computer at home.

Have you looked at daily newspaper readership among adults in the U.S.? It's 
right around 58%— just about the same as Internet usage. I'm pleasantly 
surprised it's that high. Much as I love reading and readers, I'd be surprised 
if more than 58% of adult Americans buy at least one book a year. The figure 
for reasonably regular use of public libraries among adults is a little higher 
(roughly two-thirds), but then public libraries are free at point of use.

What percentage of American adults buy at least one CD a year or go to one or 
more concerts? More than 58%? What percentage of households has sound systems 
that are anything more than boomboxes? I'll bet the penetration of stereo 
systems is lower than the penetration of personal computers. Why should the 
Internet be different?

If your business plan counted on getting a small piece of an ever-growing pie, 
with more and more people spending more and more time online, you may be in 
trouble. Maybe U.S. Internet use will pick up again; maybe it won't. But 
saturation is predictable, whether at 58%, 65%, or some other figure—probably 
a figure well below 100%. 


All Internet, All the Time
The Pew report certainly doesn't signal the beginning of the end for home use 
of the Internet, but it may signal the end of the beginning. During that 
beginning, growth seemed assured and the rate of growth kept accelerating. It 
wasn't just that more people were logging on; if you believed some pundits, we 
would all be spending more and more time online.

How many business plans assumed (or still assume) universal access, universal 
broadband, and essentially full-time use? How many pundits still claim it's 
only a matter of time before we all get broadband? Lately, the reasoning for 
universal broadband seems to be a bit perverse. People aren't lining up to 
spend $40 (or $45, or $60) each month for access that about half of them don't 
need at all—so the government needs to go in and provide universal broadband. 
Why? So the "economic engine" of universal broadband can move forward.

The Engine That Won't Go
What economic engine is that? How will broadband access from the home enrich 
the lives of Americans who don't telecommute and already have more video than 
they have any use for? A lot of the uses I've seen recently involve selling 
people more stuff, whether digital/virtual stuff or physical stuff. We're being 
asked to pony up more dollars each month so that we can be convinced to pony up 
even more dollars.

A lot of us have caught on. We already have more than enough ways to find out 
how to buy stuff: The offline world is not exactly bereft of advertising. Many 
of us don't see a need for broadband at home; some of us don't see much need in 
our daily, non-work lives for the Internet at all.

Drop Out; Drop Off
People drop off or never log on for a number of reasons. For example:

"Net evaders," people who don't use the Internet but benefit from online 
information because someone else in the household logs on, are practicing 
common sense. It's called division of labor. If she's adept at the Web and 
enjoys being online and he's not, why shouldn't he just ask her to do it (or 
vice-versa)?

Families struggling to pay the rent and put food on the table really can't 
afford an extra $20 (or $40 or $60) a month for Internet access—and probably 
don't feel a need to spend a thousand bucks or so for a PC in the first place. 
TVs? They offer mindless entertainment (and more)—something you need when 
you're on the verge. $20 buys a lot of food when you shop carefully.

For a lot of "dropouts," the promise of the Internet was never matched by 
reality. You don't need to be online to live well. If you don't like to type, 
if you don't have reliable local ISPs, or if you find the Web more of a maze 
than a conduit, you may simply choose to stay offline.

If It Matters, They Will Come
What does this mean for econtent providers? If your plans are realistic, not 
much. You didn't really plan to sell your content (or your ads, or whatever 
else fuels you business model) to everybody, did you? The most popular show on 
television reaches less than a third of U.S. households; the 
largest-circulation magazine, less than a fifth (and all of those households 
with one resident at least fifty years old). A movie's considered a hit when it 
reaches $100 million in ticket sales—but that's fewer than 15 million 
viewers, a small percentage of the U.S. population.

If you're offering something that's better than what's available offline, and 
you're aiming at people likely to stick with the Internet, you shouldn't worry. 
But "better than offline" doesn't equate to just "because it's online." That 
fantasy is dead. Most people now recognize what some of us always asserted: 
Nothing's better simply because it's online. Econtent must first be satisfying 
content—and must also offer something special by virtue of the capabilities 
the online media provides.

If your business plan required reaching 2% of an American population, all of 
which was online, can you make the case that your content will attract 4% of 
those who are actually online? If so, you're in good shape; if growth resumes, 
that's gravy.
 
http://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/ArticlePrint.aspx?ArticleID=5697&ContextSubtypeID=11
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

[lit-ideas] Fleeing the Internet