A true artists is not a capitalists - and by that I mean they don't seek profit as much as they seek recognition for their work. It's only a matter of necessity that they charge money (or at least it should be.) But as Sam Harris points out in one of his latest blog entries, "Where publishing is concerned, the Internet is both midwife and executioner. It has never been easier to reach large numbers of readers, but these readers have never felt more entitled to be informed and entertained for free."

But I disagree to some of that. It's not the internet that is killing the writer but rather it's the monetary system of capitalism. In an ideal world the artists would not have to sell his work in order to survive, he would be cared for regardless. It would be beneficial for the artists if he didn't have to sell his work because then the whole world could see what he had done. If you're a writer or artists with ideas that you think could change the world or even one person, why would you want to charge for it other than you have to in order to survive and continue your work?

It's only because the internet came after the money system that the internet is seen as the culprit. After all, writers were doing just fine when they could sell their work, right? Well no, the negative effect their slavery to wages had on their writing was just a lot more subtle, the internet has made it much more pronounced. Now even really talented writers are struggling to make ends meat.

The need to earn a wage has actually inspired many writers - and musicians - to create their best work. Deadlines are horrible but probably vital. Anyway, are all of those spelling mistakes deliberate? I don't get the point of it all.

you and sam harris make valid points Ted.

we don't really know where the net is leading us do we ?

I speak to lots of young people and few read books anymore yet even as a tactile object(with great information) a book is a wonderful thing.

perhaps iPads will save good writers. One Yank writer of mysteries has become the first to sell a million books for kindle and ipad..selling them for a few dollars and self published..it could be the internet will mean the discovery of a whole host of new brilliant writers.

The internet has become a great arena for good writers. It's broadened their audience. The negative effect is that it's also broadened the audience (and in some cases created the audience) for really bad writers. That's how it goes.

The real negative is that it's hard to find real talent and even harder to break it; in catering to all tastes including the most obscure, it has made populism harder to find.

If, like me, you consider the best is both good AND populist, it's not provided a filter yet.

And the phenomenon of instant feedback, although sometimes fascinating, has added an extra anxiety to those who actually create. Look at that ghastly TV forum on digital spy - just about every new show is savaged within a few seconds of coming on air, and most online newspaper articles are greeted by a succession of abusive trolls posting weirdly angry messages. There's no breathing space any more, barely any tolerance and no respect.