>Ever since Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson first published his “Long Tail” theory in 2004, the idea has been endlessly reinforced, contradicted, and debated. He argued that the internet’s removal of physical limitations (local audiences, scarce shelf space) would empower niche products and creators to flourish.
I'm not sure that's what Anderson argued (though I would have to go back and read his original piece). Collectively, the long tail is large even while a power law distribution means that a relatively small amount of content captures an outsized amount of attention. But that doesn't mean individual content creators in the long tail capture much attention (and compensation).
Otherwise, I guess the author is arguing that platforms should adopt strategies to create a gentler power law distribution so that more creators are in the knee of the curve because that would create a healthier environment for more people. I guess I don't really disagree with that although I'll note that most creators will still be in the long tail.
[ADDED: And ultimately it's really the users that determine the distribution even if the platform can influence it.]
I'm not sure that's what Anderson argued (though I would have to go back and read his original piece). Collectively, the long tail is large even while a power law distribution means that a relatively small amount of content captures an outsized amount of attention. But that doesn't mean individual content creators in the long tail capture much attention (and compensation).
Otherwise, I guess the author is arguing that platforms should adopt strategies to create a gentler power law distribution so that more creators are in the knee of the curve because that would create a healthier environment for more people. I guess I don't really disagree with that although I'll note that most creators will still be in the long tail.
[ADDED: And ultimately it's really the users that determine the distribution even if the platform can influence it.]