Netzkultur unter ein nachhaltiges Geschäftsmodell zu stellen, scheint aussichtslos zu sein.
Tumblr is among the most important sites online — a central hub of what is nebulously known as “internet culture.” Most recently, the site gave us Dat Boi, the unicycling frog, but Tumblr’s most famous legacy is probably the reaction GIF, which was popularized by Tumblr accounts like What Should We Call Me. Tumblr’s reblog structure, which created lengthy, publicly shared conversations between strangers, also helped popularize the concept of the Discourse, the internetwide conversation happening all at once. It is also the primary meeting place for fandoms of shows like Doctor Who and Supernatural, and films like the Marvel movies — some of the most aggressive fandoms are cultivated on Tumblr.
Auch andere Sites, die Netzkultur fördern, darunter Twitter, (ehemals) Vine, Reddit, 4chan und sogar YouTube, kämpfen damit, nachhaltig kostendeckend (oder sogar profitabel) zu werden. Denn Kultur, ob auch in Form von Netzkultur, ist kein wertloser, die Werbung begleitender Content, sondern eine (kreative) Leistung – die aber keinen Wert darzustellen scheint, um den herum man ein nachhaltiges Geschäftsmodell bauen könnte. Ist doch das Schaffen von Werten online im Vergleich zum Extrahieren von Daten wertlos:
Tumblr and Vine and the like never had data-mining operations as sophisticated as, say, Facebook. That’s why most of the advertising money in the industry has drained toward Facebook, which has 2 billion users, mounds of data, and can better assure advertisers of content cleanliness. […] And by selling ads against people’s identities, rather than their creative content, the company has churned out impressive profits, and given a wider impression that an ad-supported content platform is viable.
Unter einem ähnlichen Problem leidet gegenwärtig ja auch Medium.