Also fascinating to see how the free market will settle on the price of the content writers' services. Historically, one could argue that digital ecosystems have placed a clear value on timeliness over quality and depth, with some notable exceptions.

Unfortunately, I just don't see much of a future for long-form, written journalism on the web as a viable profession, unless you are the owner-operator of the content shop or blog. When people want timeliness, they'll go to timely sources. When they want depth, they'll go to message boards or social media channels. The latter are much more dynamic and "living" sources of deep information than static articles are.

Finally, the HuffPo contributors need to keep in mind that they tied their own bonds here. They volunteered their services for free in the first place. If you place such a low value on your own work, what do you expect you're going to get paid for it?

I have sympathy for the writers in this situation, and for writers in general. In many respects, though not professionally, I count myself among their ranks. But the way people consume information is changing fundamentally, and journalism gigs as they've traditionally existed are anachronisms.

Best way to get paid, if you're determined to be an individual content writer/contributor? Build your brand, market the hell out of yourself, and build a following. The size of your following is your most tangible indicator of worth on the market for your services.

"Unfortunately, I just don't see much of a future for long-form, written journalism on the web as a viable profession, unless you are the owner-operator of the content shop or blog. When people want timeliness, they'll go to timely sources. When they want depth, they'll go to message boards or social media channels. The latter are much more dynamic and "living" sources of deep information than static articles are."

I think the Jury is still out on this. I subscribe to the Economist and read it primarily digitally on my iPad. I suspect a lower priced 'digital only' Economist will bring in some additional revenue there. And I don't think we have yet seen a 'long form' journalism vehicle which is digital only so its still very hard to tease apart the costs vs revenue. (if there is one then I'm not yet aware of it)

Would love to hear about such a project if one exists.

Fair point. By "long-form," for the purposes of my post, I was referring really to anything longer than a handful of paragraphs. The definition of "long-form" itself is changing and is arguably becoming meaningless. But I'd consider HuffPo to be an example of what I was attempting to refer to.

I agree that this will be fascinating to watch, but I'm also surprised it took this long. From the moment the sale to AOL was announced I've been waiting for the backlash from the writers, asking for their piece of the pie.